

What's the holdup on your startup? - aswanson

Limiting factor time, money, both?  There may be an idea for a startup in what your inhibiting parameter is.
======
gscott
I was able to solve one of my holdups using news.yc. I needed a fair amount of
money to buy new servers, get really good co-location service, pay for
incorporating, and cover some other expenses. By posting to news.yc my need
and what I thought I could do (will do) I was able to find someone to buy-in a
5% stake of what I am doing. The news.yc forum is a powerful medium. In all I
found a partner willing to to give me $20,000 (its in my bank now) so I could
make things happen. 5% may seem like a lot but I figure I still own 95% and
have no need to go out and look for more money.

~~~
sbraford
This is the coolest comment I've read on news.YC in a while. Congratulations!

------
izak30
Until Dec 6th, my hangup is school, it's a time-eater. I'm taking some time
off (and probably never going back) to start my startup, with some YC style
funding from some personal sources; I feel like the money is paltry in
comparison to the contacts and the tech-world help that YC gives. That's not
necessarily a holdup of mine, just a concern. I know that it will be harder to
find good business and legal advice, and such; but it will come.

------
nostrademons
Time, and brainpower. Too big a problem, too stupid.

Money isn't really an issue - for the stage we're at now, more people would
only hurt us, so our only expenses are my living expenses (practically nil;
thank you mom & dad) and a cheap server.

~~~
izak30
What's the thinking behind "too big a problem, too stupid" and then -> "more
people would only hurt us"?

~~~
nostrademons
More people means that each one of them would need to be brought up to speed
on the problem, and then each time we try something out, we'd need to
communicate amongst us to make sure this new approach wouldn't adversely
affect (too much) what the other folks are trying out. Communication overhead
is O(n^2).

There are two stages a software project goes through. In the first, you're
exploring the design space and trying to figure out what the constraints are.
There's no architecture yet, because an architecture is a reaction to a set of
constraints, and you don't know what those are yet. So a change anywhere could
result in radical changes to the rest of the codebase. You might find out that
the approach you were trying just doesn't work at all and you need to scrap
everything and start again.

In the second, you have a basic architecture and a set of users that are happy
with the product, and you're trying to incrementally refine it so it has
broader appeal and users like it _more_. Here, developers only need to be
familiar with one section of the code, because the basic architecture is set
and changes should be fairly well localized. Things like tweaking a UI widget,
or adding a new feature, or changing look & feel.

The first situation requires that _all_ developers be familiar with _all_
parts of the code, and so (given the O(n^2) communication overhead) is best
done by a single person. The second allows developers to work in parallel on
different features, and so is best done by a large team.

This also explains how to reconcile _The Mythical Man Month_ (which recommends
a team size of one, plus supporting cast) and open-source software like Linux
(created by thousands of volunteers across the globe). Brooks was writing
about software systems before they're delivered, when the architecture is
first emerging. When Linux was new, it was created by a single developer too.
It's only after it became moderately useful that it was opened up and people
started contributing patches.

I suspect it's also behind much of the acrimony between the static-typing
(Java/C++/C#) and dynamic-typing (Python/Perl/Ruby/PHP) camps. Dynamic
languages are much better in phase 1, because they don't enforce interface
boundaries when you don't yet know the interfaces. Static languages are better
in phase 2, when you have clear interfaces and the hordes of programmers need
to know what will or will not break things outside the area they're working
on. You can use dynamic languages for this too, but you need to essentially
reinvent most of the features of static languages through documentation,
testing, and assertions.

~~~
izak30
I was just commenting on the fact that apparently you have a problem, but not
the resources to solve it, it seems that the communication overhead for even
one other person would help you see the issues and details needed to solve
whatever problem it is that is being dealt with.

~~~
nostrademons
I've got a cofounder, and yes, he helps. The problem is still brainpower-
constrained.

------
fleddermaus
My challenge is that I don't have a problem with the ambiguity behind knowing
what to do, (I love it actually) it is just getting the cahones to say, "YES,
I will commit to this uncertainty, if it kills me."

~~~
jmzachary
Same here. It's taking that step that looks like it's off a cliff. The irony
is that, in talking with other folks, I'm told the drop off is only a few
inches. The cliff is an optical illusion.

------
fuelfive
Time.

We discovered that we were generating so much data that Rails and MySQL
wouldn't cut it. We need to rearchitect our backend in data warehouse + MOLAP
terms, and ActiveWarehouse is too young to bet a company on. So, time to learn
a new platform and rewrite everything. :P

------
kirubakaran
Too much time spent on a certain social news website :)

~~~
aswanson
Ditto.

~~~
mikesabat
If you guys are serious, I'm working on a partial solution. www.shelfmade.net.

Email me and I can explain how it is a solution, if it isn't clear.

~~~
aswanson
Is it an aggregator for all online content a person browses?

------
matth
Haha, Internet Explorer quirks. Almost done actually, doing some touch-ups
here and there, and then launching an invite only beta early January.

------
ALee
Money and advisors (oh, if only YC would just accept us). We can bootstrap all
we want and keep on tapping into our bank accounts, but we need to generate
money somehow. The first product hasn't reached the powerful userbase it needs
to generate the high CPMs or the deep sponsors. The second product is launched
with a paying media partner, but that sucks because they get some of the
branding, which decreases our branding.

------
brianmckenzie
The departure of two co-founders has made it take several months longer than I
expected. All the same, I should be launching in the next week or so.

------
mrevelle
Identifying a good idea is my limiting factor. I have the ability (practical
and theoretical) to create all sorts of software, but no idea feels solid
enough to base my future on. For most of the ideas, the market is too small or
saturated.

I wonder if I'm thinking too small.

~~~
mikesabat
@ Mrevelle. Just start to build something and pitch it to people (your would
be market). The idea will always change and the feedback will always help.

Every bit of progress you make increases your future success whether it is
with this venture or another. I meet 3 people a week that need programers or
technical co-founders. If you're in NYC, email me, I can put you in touch with
people that have good ideas.

~~~
mrevelle
Thanks for the reply. I know you're right, and I have a few ideas that I
should start on and let evolve.

I am looking to join up with a few others (technical, design, or
business/marketing) but am in the DC area now and will eventually be in
Austin.

If anyone in Austin is interested in meeting, please lob an email my way.

------
BitGeek
Non-startup related chores that really can't be put off. That and a thorny
technical problem that would be solvable if I could get a few days to focus on
it, if I didn't have these non-startup chores.

~~~
bootload
_"... Non-startup related chores ..."_

Same here to some extent. There are certain tasks ( _"fatigues"_ ) that I have
to do at set times during the day. The only suggestions I have is to focus on
small bits at a time and chip away. Another thing is to use exercise as
thinking time. Think on very specific problems. Write your solutions as you
get them. Then work on them.

Another suggestion might be to adopt the Joshua Schacter (Schacter worked
while building delicious) model of _"being lazy"_. You can read/listen more
about his techniques here. [0], [1]

[0] <http://notelab.infogami.com/startupschool2006>

[1]
[http://wiki.ycombinator.com/presentations/apr06/Joshua_Schac...](http://wiki.ycombinator.com/presentations/apr06/Joshua_Schacter.mp3)

ps; Oops I downvoted by mistake while trying to upvote, so I re-adjusted via
prior comments.

------
louisadekoya
Not being a hacker and not having enough money just yet to hire one for my
startup. So I spend a lot of time looking for and trying out shortcuts that
tend not to amount to much.

------
sspencer
Probably getting enough funding up to start working full time on it. I am
loathe to quit my day job before I have at least enough cash to last 6 months
or so stored up.

------
run4yourlives
Time... it's not on my side.

------
edw519
3 things:

Time, time, & time

------
einarvollset
visas

