Most successful LAMP sites use software from more than one bucket. That is not news.
|
cached 11 days ago
Let me give you a scoop, then: Lots of 37signals code is not in Rails, either. We run Solr for search. We use a C-based poller for Campfire. We call out to ImageMagick for transformations of images.
|
|
cached 29 days ago
I fully agree that different businesses require different levels of input to make it work. But this crowd seems to be mostly in the "web business" area, so I think our example is at the very least relevant.
And we're saying here's an example of a web startup that didn't follow the traditional wisdom of "long hours necessary for business success", which is offered as one data point that perhaps "long hours" isn't the success requirement as some might think it is. Similar to the talk from SUS on Gmail's invitation system. Just because Gmail used an invitation system and had success doesn't mean that using an invitation system will give you success. (BTW, as meta comment, I'm incredibly impressed with the level of discussion here. It's so un-web like ;). Where are all the personal insults, the trolling, and all that which we've otherwise come to accept must be part of a open-for-all comment box. Very nice job!) |
|
cached 29 days ago
I think the reason for that is more one of risk. Starting a new company is a lot more risky than being an employee of one. And if you have a family to support, you're less likely to be willing to take on big risk.
So I absolutely agree that it's easier to start a company when you're single and have no obligations because you can tolerate much more risk. Update: Seems that the original argument changed from "if kids are so great, why aren't more founders parents when they start their business" to "kids might make you more productive during regular working hours, but you need more than just regular working hours to start a business". I'm happy to offer my thoughts on the second argument as well. I think people working on startups generally work way too much and the ones that succeed don't do so because they put in 14-hour days. At 37signals, our "startup" (Basecamp) got off the ground on a 10 hour/week programming budget and designers who were busy doing client projects. For the first year, it wasn't the sole focus for the company. We believe those constraints were instrumental in their way they shaped Basecamp and thus part of the success of the company. Doesn't mean that there might not be other businesses out there where working lots and lots of hours can be beneficial somehow, but I think that it's a fallacy that you need to work crazy hours to succeed. I do believe that others believe this, though, I just don't think it's healthy or beneficial. All of this is somewhat tangential to the original argument, though, which is that you shouldn't be afraid of hiring family people. Who should start a company is a great debate as well, though. |
|
cached 11 days ago
Now where's the TC retraction? (oh, forgot, there's no link-bait in boring stuff like accuracy)
|
|
cached 29 days ago
You're exactly right. Startup School was a great way to collect some thoughts that had been scattered for a while. A real energy boost.
|
|
cached 29 days ago
I think that's a pretty narrow definition of a startup. Also, there are plenty of businesses that start out small and then grow very large over time. Actually, most large businesses took a long time to get there.
Say like foot locker or Zappos for a "shoe store" (both big business) and say McDonald's or Olive Garden for a restaurant. By the same measure, we're building 37signals to grow as well. Grow revenues, grow customers, grow influence. We're just not that hooked on growing head count or office space (which are often the most visible indicators of growth for a private company and thus often mistaken as the only indicators). To me a startup simply means a new business that's getting off the ground. That business may well end up big one day and it may not, which is okay too. I generally don't think that you can become a star by trying to be a star. I think you just try to be the best at what you do and if you are, hopefully the star part will take care of itself. |
|
cached 8 days ago
I'm truly honored to have a whole post dedicated to me because a mistake on a list of 101 computer quotes. Someone has too much time on their hands.
Oh, and OF COURSE I was quoting Alan Kay. |
|
cached 9 days ago
Not really, actually. This is in part why we turned down 30 VCs, but were interested in getting involved with Bezos. He's as interested as we are in making this a company that'll be around for 20 years. (And should that turn out not to be the case, Bezos is a minority investor and will have no power to force a sale).
37signals is not for sale now and probably never will be. We like what we're doing too much and are more than comfortable with just the simple financial success of a profitable business making dividends. Again, doesn't mean that our way is the only way. I'm just trying to do mine to encourage others to see it as a viable alternative to the funding -> sell out route. |
|
cached 29 days ago
So someone is arrogant when you don't agree with them? And you don't even have to know what they're saying to make that call, you just have to read a three-word summary? What a unique path to expanding your horizon.
|
|
cached 9 days ago
Investors can make money the same way founders can: Dividends. But yeah, that's a slow, boring way of earning a return in the eyes of some. It's not nearly as spectacular as a 10-100x return from a sale.
|