This is your first problem. First, features do not sell software. If there were a Ten Commandments of customer acquisition in the Internet age that would be #2 right after "Google is your god, you shall have no others." People use software and use websites because of the benefit that you credibly propose to bring to their lives through use of the software. Ironically, your users are even telling you this, which is fantastic because most of the time they don't have accurate insight into why your site doesn't do it for them. (Incidentally, "I don't know what problem you're solving" really means "I don't know what problem THAT I ACTUALLY HAVE will get better instantly if I sign up for this.")

StackOverflow is incredibly more complicated than Facebook is. You need an accurate mental model of how the game works in order to play it. (Seeing answers is easier, of course.) There is a reason Joel and company try to seed new Stack Overflow sites with people who have used one of the pre-existing ones. (That also helps solve the chicken and egg problem, which I suspect your sites are likely suffering from in a severe fashion.)

Early adopters are a quirky bunch. One of their problems is that other people are cooler than they are because those people have technology that they haven't used yet. Another of their problems is that the software they previously liked is now lame because even their mother uses it. Most people do not have these problems.

Talk to people. Find out what their pains, fears, frustrations are. This is not hard -- most people love to talk about what they hate about their life, jobs, etc. Identify problems which are tractable with software. Develop the smallest possible thing that shows the vision of a solution. See if it 'clicks' with people. If it clicks, you know you have a viable idea for a product. If not, development is generally expensive guessing.

P.S. Translation from user into English: "It's too complicated" => "I am insufficiently invested in this to do the work that it looks like it is going to take to extract the unknown amount of value I may get out." There are a number of solutions: simplification, hiding the complexity, easing the users into the complexity, and demonstrating higher value. Your user can play effing bridge, she is clearly capable of understanding complex systems when the spirit moves her.

Embedded assumption #475 in Stack Overflow users: it is obvious that replying to a question is not Answering it.

I have no idea what the badges, karma, etc. are. For me, it works quite well. In fact, the only mildly confusing thing for me was that I had to use some OpenID thing to login the first time.

Think about that. Their value prop to someone coming in through Google or posting a question is simple and the barrier to entry is very low.

My first experiences with the site weren't too good: I tried to upvote a comment (I mean, there's a big fat arrow to the left of the comment!), and then I tried to answer the question and I believe it didn't let me either...

If you want to I'll try finding it :) (it should be on my PC somewhere, I don't usually delete those things)

Edit: I'll put my e-mail on my profile, sorry people for the offtopic.

No, you're not. I remember looking at stackoverflow once and there was some sort of New here? Read this wall of text to get started! to which I responded Awesome! Maybe I'll read that when I have looked at the latest pictures on reddit!

Stackoverflow incorrectly assumed that I gave a shit about their website. They can get away with it because they have technical users who often don't react like that. But if your users aren't technical, then you can't possibly overestimate how much they don't care about your website.

* Posting a question: I go to the site, click on "Ask," and post my question.

* Searching for answers: I go to the site, type in my search, and search.

Facebook:

* Posting a photo: I go to the site and look for a camera icon. I can't find one, so I start clicking on stuff like "Account", "Home" and "Profile". Still nothing. I start clicking on everything that isn't a friend's wall post. Eventually I hit "More" on my list of apps (the fully-expanded list still doesn't take up the entire height of my screen), and see "Photos". I look for an upload button and see nothing. In the upper right corner, in 10pt font, I eventually find "My Albums." I click there and search for an upload button. Nothing. I click "Create album," and finally get to an upload prompt.

* Changing a privacy setting: I see a post on Hacker News about some new Facebook feature, and of course, the default is "Everyone in the world can see everything that this feature involves, even if it's something you locked down for every other feature." No one has posted a reply explaining how to lock it down yet, but it's Facebook, right? How hard could it be? I go to Facebook and click "Privacy Settings." Honestly, they change the layout every few months, so I have no idea what it looks like now, and I don't remember what it looked like last time, but every single time, I have to re-learn the entire model and it takes forever and half the time I don't even find what I'm looking for.

* Take a quiz: See a quiz on a friend's wall. Click on the app name. Click on "Take Quiz." Get a popup saying "Let this app access your profile: [Click Here]." Close tab.

- click once in the "what's on your mind box"

- click on the "attach photo" icon

Privacy is a different thing, it was once quite easy but everyone was crying that there's "too many options", so they made some mess with it.

Also, posting on stackoverflow requires you to be familiar with Markdown, an obscure markup language based on conventions used by geeks on mailing lists.

On facebook, the first thing you do is look at other people's posts and statuses. And that's incredibly easy; you don't even do anything, facebook just shows it to you.

The first time I used facebook, I was like whaa? What's a WALL? What's the difference between a post and a note? How is sharing a link specifically different from embedding it in your status?

Lots of complexity there, but we learn it after a while.

People join facebook because all their friends are on it, and they get to see a news feed.

It's not instantly familiar or usable, and no one knows what's a wall or a news feed, but when you find pictures of a friend you haven't seen in 10 years, you'll probably stick around and try to figure it out.

Of course, at the beginning the only users where college students and people in their teens or twenties. But now even people in their forties join just because they can keep in touch with their distant relatives and old friends.

* Take picture * Hit 'send to facebook' (maybe add a caption) * Done

On that sense Facebook is very simple as what you can do is almost entirely driven by whether you're friends with someone or not, and the mechanism for becoming friends (or stopping being friends) is straight forward.

Obviously that's a somewhat simplistic view though and ignores little factors such as doing even the simple things with 300 million users is massively complex.

From a software perspective it's really no harder to gather and store 1000 words on a detailed C++ problem than it is to gather and store "Mmm mmm mmm, Justin Bieber, he's soooo dreamy".

"it just means that it has a very specific requirement for the knowledge of the participants,"

is not a trivial exercise that should be left to the reader.

The technical issue for Stackoverflow is to make editing an standards enforcement efficient and socially desirable to a highly tech savvy community.

It's not storage, it's filtering.

StackOverflow, for example, was sold on features. Look at the early pitches -- it's a reddit+wiki replacement for Experts Exchange. Developers already knew that PHPBB and EE sucked for Q&A. They added voting and editing of old answers, and the demand flowed to them.

The difference isn't features vs lack of features; it is features vs BENEFITS. This is the thing "business people" bring to the hackerverse.

It's the designers who deserve the credit here, not the business people.

Plus, not all hackers are feature-centric. There are many hackers who understand design.

Speaking just for myself: I don't use SO (or reddit) because of the features they offer. I use them because of the communities involved. I think that's the point here -- there are loads of sites that can compete on features (reddit, meet digg...) but lack something else. It's that "something else" that drives success (partially; I'm not suggesting it's entirely based on some esoteric quality, but that the specific quality can be different for different applications).

Their combined blog readership was huge. They capitalized on that audience, not just the features.

I've always thought that, but Joel Spolsky did an excellent talk where he made the exact opposite point. Skip to 25:00:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2010/08/19.html

You're saying early adopters want try to be impressive by using new technology? That one of early adopters' "problems" (that you are trying to provide a solution to) is jealousy?

Apply practically built an entire company on this notion.

I concur, dear Sir, I concur.

Sent from my iMac.

I've realized that I can bravely bet against at least some of the trends. Based on my built things and their failures I started to find out the things which are overrated. In my opinion webapps are overrated, internet consumer market is overrated (or at least too risky for small startups), mobile apps are overrated (kind of a 'trash market' a bit), Javascript is overrated, importance of graphical design is overrated, simplicity and usability is overrated (I mean if you are talented, you can get it right quite easily, but you will never be able to create a business just because of simplicity, usability, etc...)

What things are not overrated?

- 'Build what people pay a lot for'

- At least partially solve really-really painful, fustrating, important problems of not only natural persons but also (mostly) companies.

- The enterprise market is very very important. Big companies are not sexy, but they pay a lot for software if they need software.

- Jack of all trade-ness is overrated. I try to gain experience in at least one or two really hard topics, which few people know.

I will see how it turns out. I never say never though. I try to be flexible; and act upon opportunities. Felxibility is not overrated.

I think enterprise is not an easy market to enter. Enterprises are very shy of giving projects to startups and also you need to spend a few years fixing enterprise problems to build good solutions.

Another problem is that companies tend to take a long time and to make a decision hence lot of time and money gets blocked in the sales process...

I am writing this based on experience. I am trying to push the model but not too successful yet!

- Rushabh

ERPNext.com

http://www.amureprints.com/img1/doonesbury/2001/db010325.gif

"Boring stuff that people actually need?" "Yup. You'd be surprised how lucrative it is."

You seemed to have missed the "guilt everyone you know into using your product" phase. I've met very few startup founders that didn't fight tooth-and-nail for every single early user. You have to do whatever it takes to get those users on board. It won't be scalable, but you can worry about scaling user acquisition later, after you've gotten some feedback.

Nowadays, things need to look great. Some people partner or pay for programmers, you need to partner with or pay for good design. Don't skimp.

Every single chance you have in your product, convey the problem that you are solving, how you are solving it and importantly who you are solving it for. Look at 37Signals as an example. I think they spend 25% - 50% of their time thinking about the message they are conveying throughout their product - not just through their marketing sites.

Never (never, never, never) expect people to use your product or service. Get the word out fast, hard and often. Unless you get lucky (never count on luck), this will cost you money in one form or another. The amount of money you'll need to spend directly relates to the competition in the niche you are operating in.

Listen and pivot. When your customers / users tell you something, listen to them. Don't assume that you're the smartest guy in the world and "know what they want before they want it". Listen and even if you don't believe in it, try moving in the direction that your customers / users want. If income increases, pivot your business or entire model in that direction.

Never (ever) get married to an idea and remember that business is about making money.

Don't judge yourself against others. Every business, every person, every circumstance is unique. Constantly review your product or service but evaluate it against your own metrics. Don't ignore what others are doing, but if your product is successful earning $25k per year, it is successful.

Keep your chin up and do not give up. It sounds cliche, but the worst mistake someone can make is to give in to the part of themselves that drags them down. If something isn't working, change it and be happy, excited and motivated to make yet another change in a long line of changes.

It's more than adding features to a product.

I suspect Facebook is easy to use because people can see the benefit in learning how to use it. They can see how tagging an image is a cool thing, so they'll make the effort. If they can't immediately see how upvoting a question is a cool thing, they won't bother to understand how to use it.

Obviously you can get quality feedback. Iterate on that. If it's not clear what problem you are solving, you just tell them. There's no shame in writing "This is a listings page, add a listing HERE" in 80px black bold Arial on top of the page, if it makes people use it ;)

As long as people can find you on search engines, they will come. But from there on, you have to guide them to use your service instead of expecting them to do all the work.

Actually, that's not too far off from a suggestion Paul Graham made at the first Startup School a few years ago, in his "Ideas for Startups" speech (http://paulgraham.com/ideas.html):

One way to make something people want is to look at stuff people use now that's broken.

There's a big difference, though, between missing or misimplemented and broken.

If it's misimplemented, but basically does what I need it to do, then I'm not as open to an alternative.

If it's broken, then I'll seek out another product or a third-party plugin.

Stackoverflow is targeted at geeks- if you're cloning their design, you need to clone the target audience as well. .net development != women's issues.

what i mean by wtf is, these people can do and interact with applications that i can not keep up with, and still find my applications, or the applications that i find interesting "to be complicated".

Oh, and remember, there are lots of people who don't even know what a URL is. SO worked because lots of JoS / Coding horror readers trusted it enough. They also know what tagging is - most of your readers are more familiar with phpbb style indexes. Nobody looks at the tag cloud unless they have already know what they are looking for.

Think about the products that "go viral". I think there is an increasing trend for these to have roots in the real world. Twitter didn't succeed until real people in the real world met in a real bar at a real conference and really talked about it. I didn't start using it until a real person I knew was talking to me at a real place after going to SXSW. Same story on Facebook. Real people in my real world had a real conversation with me about it.

My advice - make your product opaque. I know it's 2010, but your product needs to be "real" for "them". Find some target end users, get them using it, and enable them to broadcast their use/enjoyment/etc.

Why don't you list a few here, and maybe we can help you refine your pitch.

one i'm lately struggling with is visitrs.com, i've posted it a few times before, did not get much response, ones i get was helpful though.It has started as a pluggible chat system which allowed visitors of any website to chat with eachother. It would provide interaction between visitors, would create a community around the website, would help people discuss or suggest products, articles on the website boosting content awareness of the website. for example on ebay, one could have easily ask opinions of other visitors about a product to be bought.. anyway did not gain attention, so i changed it into a stumbleupon+delicious+live chat system. still truggling with it.

one was a real time sql multiplier proxy. problems with production servers back then 2006-2008 was - and most probably still is- backups, cloning on the fly, active-active clustering etc. one would have to stop the working system to backup or clone the datas in sql servers, and active-active clustering were painful or too expensive. I made a working demo based on postgresql + spread real time mesaging toolkit, which was acting like a proxy between sql servers and web applications. when a web application made a query, it was multiplied and sent to all servers in exact same order, which would allow real time cloning + backing up + active-active clustering in once. Though demo was sufficient for simple ops, it needed transaction system implemented, which was really not a big deal. Couldn't sell it. the companies that were paying zillons to big players, or spending thousands of man/day operations did not get what i was solving.

another one that is still on production line is a job listing system, which will get rid of "send cv - wait for response" and "read zillions of cvs, call hundreds of persons just to hire 1" problems. it's a social marketplace for job seekers and hirers simply. i'm not over it yet, but the feedbacks about it is not giving happines yet. addres is test.cbslab.com if anyone interested.

there are many more in the attic, maybe they'll help me when there'll be enough amount of abondoned ones to give up my carreer and become a farmer :)

The first 5 seconds of looking at your page filled my head with 'This is just a page of shit that I'm not interested in'. It was not clear that I can participate in creating the list. your join now button is virtually invisible to passing users.

I have to click an 'about' page to find out what the site does. this is way too much effort. this needs to be splashed all over the front page.

Once I understand what it is, it's not as good as my existing bookmarking sites. Struggling to see where the USP is.

My gut feeling is that you might be able to get it to work if you work in the niches - people into baking would rather join a dedicated cake site than something that is as general as this. Buy 10 niche domain names and work in the communities they target. Makes SEO a damn site easier too.

Hope this helps!

maybe it won't make it, but the best part of it is i got many feedbacks including yours that'll help me in the future.

also i learnt much about erlang, ejabberd, mongodb, js frameworks, xapian etc. not that much of loss i guess :)

Transactional integrity across replicas is a big deal--it is, in fact, the hard part. Telling people it's not makes them think you don't know databases and they shouldn't trust your code. Maybe they were wrong (maybe I'm wrong), but it sounds like that's the impression you were giving.

There's no replica in the system. There are clients (clients of messaging system are sql servers) that are not realated to any other sql server in no means, which receive the same commands from a web application in the very same order each time.

Replication is lightweight and done in the sql proxy by replicating the messages, not in the sql servers. Simply it's a 1-1 connection between a web-app and sql-server, but the messages are multiplied by the number of sql-servers which made it a 1-N real time cloning system.

1. Your product seems too common place 2. I do not see enough energy in the UI - like stack overflow that looks warm and friendly.. Ask people to upload their photos etc. 3. Whats your niche? Why should I invest my time and not use delicious.

Contrary to what you think, your design is quite neat. Its just you need to select a niche and respond to what your early users are saying!

- Rushabh

ERPNext.com

I've been completely unable to gain traction for isshort.com, with 43 visits to the site in about 5 days.

1. The landing page does not tell what the service is for and who is it for.

On the first look, it looks like just another URL shortener - but why would I use it over something like 3.ly or j.mp?

2. I tried to read the explanation but bored out. I don't care what "healthy link shortening" is or what rev="canonical" does. The blog post is longwinded and filled with jargon and terms I don't understand. "Publisher"? Am I a "publisher"? Do I want to be? What is the target audience? Am I in the target audience? It's difficult to find out.

3. I put in "google.com" and out comes INVALID_URI.

4. Not having a "Submit" button feels somehow awkward. I'm not sure what I should do in order to shorten the URL. I eventually discovered that pressing Enter and clicking on the "isn't short" text works, but I'd feel better with a "Submit" button.

It's a serious mistake to disallow shortening TLDs like "google.com", because that's what people are likely to type in to test the service. It's deadly to ever let a user see a hostile, wholly uninformative error message like "INVALID_URI".

Owing to unnecessary ajax and a submit button which doesn't reflect presses, if I fail with google.com and then try yahoo.com, there's no indication that the site has received or acted on my second attempt.

Labeling your only button with an image, in an oddball font, using text that's both passive voice and a negative statement, is not OK, as you implicitly acknowledge in the introductory blog post, when you have to tell your potential users which piece of screen real-estate to click.

I knew what rev=canonical and friends were, and even I didn't have any idea what the phrase "healthy link shortening" meant to you. I thought it might have been a point about not relying on the Libyan government. The introductory blog post isn't doing its job. The list of sites with their own shorteners should be on the front page, and should be longer — that's how you connect the site's value with potential users.

The service itself is useful, though I'd most like to see it incorporated into Twitter clients like Hibari, which use bit.ly for everything. Evangelizing an API is harder. Good luck.

I will work on explaining this a bit better.

3. Thanks again. I wasn't aware of that. It's bit.;y's error message, not mine.

4. I will implement a submit button soon.

Healthy link shortening is a 'nice to have', not something most folks will go out of their way to us.

Personally, I wouldn't start using a new tool for the benefit of the web in general when there's an immediate benefit to me for using a competing product. There's got to be a user benefit besides improving the web.

You're confused about who I consider my user. My target audience is a developer, not an end user. The web page is only there as a demo; the product is the API.

Publishers would like people to use their shortener, but that doesn't give developers anything.

Most consumers don't care. Some do, and prefer bit.ly because they trust it (and they like the intelligence it gives them)

If you're going to build something, throw it live, and hope people find it, you're going to need to make sure it's something people will actually be looking for. There are lots of things like that. There are actually only a few that aren't, and unfortunately you've picked the biggest one.

For what I got, you use the shortener of each website (if available) to generate a short URL. Like use youtu.be for YouTube URLs and default to j.mp otherwise.

You claim on the front page to be a different kind of URL shortener and with my first try it seemed to be just as any other URL shortener. You give a long link, it makes a short link.

You should maybe put a concise text on the homepage about what it does and why it's better. Not in a super long blog post that starts by saying when people use URL shorteners

UI is a bit weird — there is no submit button, no progress for the magic ajaxy thing.

Page that explains what it's about starts with mix of obviousness and downsides.

2. There is a submit button. The "isn't Short" image is a button. I'll fix that soon. Also, I'll add a progress bar. Is that something that's really detracting from people using the site, though?

3. How would you restructure the blog post about it?

If button gives click feedback and you can shorten in 1-2 seconds, then you might not need a progress bar.

Explain on the page, in something that can be read in 4 seconds, what is that any why should anybody use it (problems you solve that others don't).

Assume nobody reads the blog post.

I'm am not an apple fan, mind you, I am an Android dev who built a podcasting app - and most of the complaints I get are "I can't figure it out" and "why is it so complicated". It is overloaded with features and some appreciate it, but some don't.

The way I think of it, is that life is frustrating at times, and people will go to great lengths to avoid that feeling of frustration. Software might do a lot but if it not quick to use then its pretty well useless. In time gone by, how many man hours been wasted trying to find that elusive checkbox in windows to fix a certain small problem.

Simplicity is the most important thing, people want life to be simple - why can't it be simple !!! That's why apple is making billions.

There is always an element of randomness though. To some people a design (e.g. my podcasting app) will seem logical, but to others it will be a frustrating mess. I am happy to have a set of users who are fairly tech capable. but I do constantly receive a hail of abuse from the less capable who really want to use it, but cant figure it out. Some people actively resent the fact that I have made them feel stupid (Saying exactly "I am not stupid", had that exact phrase about 30 times I think).

Sometimes I think 3 interfaces to a product are necessary, "simple"(only basic stuff), "cool" (medium), and "super"(everything). Different people like different things.

>>I've been in the "build->launch->move to next project" loop for some time.

From my experience making a few apps, launching is just the first step, not the last. People will care about products you care about. If you're just building stuff to throw out onto the internetz and hope a few randos latch on... well, that's exactly what you'll get. If you want dedicated users who keep coming back, you'll have to steadily improve your projects, and nurture them into full-fledged awesome products. There are no shortcuts, what you put in is what you get out (usually).

Also, the original idea is almost never perfect. Products evolve over time, flickr didn't start as a photo site. Listen to you customers, but not too much, find the problems that REALLY need solving. Like Henry Ford said, "if I listened to the customers, I would have made a faster horse." What he really means that the customers wanted faster transportation, not necessarily a horse. You need that insight to see what the core problems are, and solve them in novel ways.

>>I lack visual design skills, but yet trying to do my best to provide a usable UI for the products. One of my motives in building a product against my lack of visual skills is knowing that "they started as crap too".

That is not good enough. Knowing you suck at UX is a good start. But justifying it by calling out reddit, twitter, and stumbleupon? That's just naive. You want to know what made them succeed? THEY GOT BETTER. They didn't sit on their ass saying "well, those other guys suck, so I can too." No, they were the ones saying "I'll endlessly strive to make my product better every single day."

Software adopts the personality of the developer(s). Users can tell when the developer actually loves and cares about something enough to follow through with good support and updates. Similarly, users want software that gets to the core of their problems, not just shallow complaints, which brings me to my next point:

>>My projects are mostly based on features that are missing or misimplemented in the existing products.

Do NOT base your software on a feature. Features are shallow, like breast implants. Build VISION and PERSONALITY into your software, and people will love you even if you're flat-chested. Again, this goes back to UX/UI and taking care of your product and helping it evolve a personality AFTER launch.

Just wanted to make sure no one glossed over that gem. Great quote.

I believe there are two highly valuable skills you need to run a successful business: 1. The ability to create amazing products (either yourself or through motivating others) and 2. Ability to get your message out and get people interested.

I fail badly at #2. I guess I need to find a partner who is naturally magnetic and can sell dreams to people. The thing is, once you're over that hump you'll get momentum -- you can ask for feedback, you can engage with those people, and, hopefully, they'll hep you spread the word. Alternatively, you can throw ad-dollars at it and work on the conversion rate, but advertising is mostly owned by people with lots of money so you'll drown before you manage to even start swimming.

An important element of useablility that is often ignored and misunderstood is familarity. In many ways it just does not matter that MSWindows or Facebook is clunky, or violates important useability or is just wrong or broken. When the environment hits a critial mass of familarity the only way to co-exist with an entrenched community is compatibility. As galling as it is to use a windows file picker look & feel, it's what folks are familar. Changing the visual paradigms does happen (review the history of the web) but fairly quicky a new normalicy (see web pulldown bars) gets established. Show some examples and/or look for a design partner.

I'm using many confusing and ugly products but since they solve my problem, I use them (all HA software product on market, etc.).

I believe the key to solve something people really need. Hey I still have problems how to do code reviews (for cheap - like $10 per seat) - something like google wave but code reviews.

Now, there is also problem how to get your message out and get people interested (since they might not know they have a problem you are solving). I was told to watch infomercials on TV and try to make something like that on your home page, blogs, forums...

I've been doing small self-generated projects with 1-2 partners for years. One of them is gaining traction and about to take off in a big way (I hope). I never would have got to this stage on my own.

Note that having a partner isn't the same as selling out, or developing a project with an overmanaged 12-person team, etc. It's pretty much the same as going it alone but with a friend to bounce shit off of.

I do, however, recommend that you worry about that pesky "i didn't understand which problem you are solving" issue.

My advice would be to shut down your computer and talk to your friends and family. Go to dinner. Tag along with them in the grocery store. Even better... do something with them that you enjoy. And then listen to what's going on in their lives. What challenges are they facing? What challenges are you facing?

Start making a list of these things. You don't even have to write them down, but make mental notes of the things people struggle with. Every time you come across a challenge, think "could a computer help with this problem?" If the answer is yes, then think "how hard would it be to engineer?" If the answer is "not too hard for me to knock out a prototype in a week or two" then add this to another list in your head: promising ideas.

You'll need a lot of them. I have a list of about a hundred products that I think I could build in a week that solve a problem that I or someone I know cares about.

With that list, start thinking about the ideas in more detail. Think about some of the implementation details in your head. Maybe spend a few hours starting to implement some of the trickier parts of them to get a sense of how har they'd really be. Think about how you could make money off of them.

Notice which ideas keep popping into your head. Notice which ideas make you excited when you think about how they would feel to have built. Notice which ideas come up over and over.

You need to be doing this all the time.

Start telling people about your more promising ideas. Pitch to your friends, your family, your coworkers, strangers you meet at parties. Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. Any feedback you get at this stage is worth much more than the risk of losing an idea you have barely invested in. There's always another, better idea down the road.

Notice the difference between mild enthusiasm and genuine enthusiasm. "That sounds great!" doesn't mean much. "I need that! You should build that!" means a lot more. "I told my friend about your idea and they want it too!" means the most. If you find an idea that is already spreading before you've even built the site, that's a good sign.

Once you start to have ideas that a) solve a problem several people care about, b) are something you can implement, c) seem like they could make some money, d) excite and spread through your friends, and d) keep coming back into your head, that's when you should start implementing them more seriously. Write a 1-2 week minimum viable product.

I really think that if you do this kind of exploration process, you'll have a much stronger footing to stand on with your products. It's much faster to play with the idea in this way than it is to make a prototype, and you need to evaluate hundreds or thousands of ideas before you find a good one, so stick to this kind of fast evaluation process. Save prototyping for ideas that have already been vetted.

I actually thought: "man, I want this to succeed, it would be awesome if they could pull it off, it is obvious that such a thing will work only if they have some initial users, so I'll use it for a week and hope that it gets enough momentum".

I can't really pin it down what prompted that initial reaction, but it was somehow more than it being useful. It could be the minimalist design or the way the developers sounded, I just wanted to help them.

People come to "BBS's" for the content of the discussions. The software needs to extend that content or enhance the community. For many purposes, off the shelf packages are probably sufficient. If your users want phpbb features, then using phpbb is the way to go.

Who is 'they' ? How many are "they" ? right now , where are "they"? Do you know even one of the "they"?

Ahh, its so much easier to give advise . If it makes you feel any better, I am also trying to find my version of "they".

In the meanwhile, get Steve Blank's Epiphany book and keep reading and applying until you have found the "they".

Good Luck !!

Testing & dev doesn't count. Are you passionate user #1?

somehow society just decides your thing is cool. like when there's 5 equal products and one is successful for no particular reason.

i always think about how weird bars are. you can 2 equal bars but 1 is packed every night... even with zero distinguishing differences. society just says 'oh that bar usually has people, let's go there'.

the problem may not be the product but figuring out how to convince people it's the cool _______ to use.

I don't think it's chance. If there are 5 equal products and 1 is successful, there is a reason. You may not be able to see it right away, but it's probably due to: UI, marketing (the right people saw it), benefits, or simplicity.

Look at twitter as an example of this. It's a simple idea and there were many other potential competitors, yet it's still #1. Why?

I read an article about how they targeted influential bloggers (people that had thousands of readers). This wasn't luck, it was an intelligent marketing move. Myspace did the same thing. They targeted musicians (which in turn got fans to get on board).

"i always think about how weird bars are. you can 2 equal bars but 1 is packed every night... even with zero distinguishing differences. society just says 'oh that bar usually has people, let's go there'."

If you can get women to want to come to your bar, the guys will follow and you will have a packed bar. Two bars also are never "equal". There will always be differences (ambiance, drinks, price, maybe the bathrooms are unclean, etc).

At a certain point Rainbow sandals became the defacto sandal of southern frat boys. Did they market to them? No. Some influencer decided he liked them and it slowly spread. Now it's just the established norm. Most of society just follows trends. And if you're a company, you are at the mercy of these trends. Yes you can try to create them, but you can fail just because your rival got lucky.

Did Smirnoff Ice instigate Bros Icing Bros? No but they're sales spiked because of it.

Did PBR market to hipsters? No but they adopted it as their own and now PBR reaps the benefits.

Run DMC wrote about Adidas without being paid a cent. Was Adidas really BETTER than any other shoe brand? Adidas just kind of got lucky.

You may throw something back at me about reaching influencers... yes you can try to do that.... but to a certain degree you're at the mercy of society's whims.

You are right about this. But, the amount of companies that became successful due to this sort of luck are the exception rather than the rule. It doesn't happen that often.

For example: you can't, really, have two equal bars. They are going to be in two different locations, and one of those locations is likely better (even if only slightly) than the other. This can be enough of a difference to create a critical mass of people to get the "Cool, this bar is always hopping" effect.

"Zero distinguishing differences" usually just means you haven't analyzed deeply enough.

Stackoverflow is designed for tech-savvy people.

You can't just make assumptions about what your users want/need/know. You actually have to listen to feedback. If your response to feedback is "WTF", well that explains why you don't have many users.

It also means you didn't really build 'it'; you built the wrong thing and you don't want to fix it.

btw, usability > visual appeal.