

Ask HN: The Widget Economy Discussion - bertm

I was persuaded to write this article because I am building a struggling new widget (defined loosely as a single feature product, i.e. iPhone App, web 2.0 startup).  However this is ask HN is not about my widget, but about the enormous quantity of widget makers and widgets being made. I would like to start a HN discussion about the widget economy and how we entrepreneurs can “get the best of it”.<p>First, I would like to discuss why these widgets are important. A widget seems to be a low cost way to solve a particular pain point. In order for a widget to be viable (Such that the widget maker profits from making and maintaining said widget), there must be a minimum number of users. The definition of profits may vary depending on the maker/maker-organization such as financial or social gain.<p>Second and most important, how many widgets can people actively use? (i.e. Online  tools, iphone apps, etc.) A better way to state this is: How many widgets will one actively pay for? I would speculate a guess that there is limit after which people become saturated. It follows that there would then be a consolidation of widgets into features of a “suite” (defined loosely as a collection of related widgets). At this consolidation point, an entrepreneur would like to be a suite maker rather than a widget maker.<p>Would anyone be willing to speculate answers to the following questions?-- Preferably quantitative
1.How many users must a widget (again, a single feature product) have to be a viable business? 
2.How many widgets will a person actively use and pay for? 
3.At what widget count do you tend to see a consolidation into "suites"?
4.When (in what markets, with what user base, etc.) is it advantageous to build a single feature product vs. a product “suite”?
======
patio11
You seem to be very interested in grouping software by distinctions which do
not matter to your users. I would suggest not grouping software by
distinctions which do not matter for your users.

Your users do not have a point at which their demand for software is
saturated, any more than they have a point at which their demand for products
is saturated. Your software solves a need or a want for them. Needs or wants
are essentially infinite. (We live lives of ridiculous abundance compared to
99.999% of all humans who ever lived, and yet we still don't have enough.
Whether that is just a statement of fact or indictment of consumerist society
is up to you.)

Nobody looking for bingo cards for mom's birthday party says "Hold on, wait a
minute -- do I need a widget for this, or a suite?" Nor does playing the
software taxonomy game help me sell a single copy to any customer anywhere.

As to the question of how many paying customers you need to make a go of
things, that question actually matters, but forget about the impact of
widgets. I'm going full time with about 1,000 sales a year, which puts me more
than ramen profitable at my price point ($30) and cost structure. That is not
a one-size-fits-all answer: if you have multiple founders to support, have a
wife and kids in San Fransisco, etc, you might need more. If on the other
hand, you're billing customers $20 a month, you need rather less.

~~~
bertm
"I would suggest not grouping software by distinctions which do not matter for
your users."

Yet naturally there seem to be these distinctions drawn; Useful in both
understanding markets and producing usable products. A personal example: I use
MS Office, Adobe Master Collection, Intuit Quickbooks; all natural collections
of single feature software.

"Your users do not have a point at which their demand for software is
saturated, any more than they have a point at which their demand for products
is saturated."

It seems natural that there would be a saturation point, because a consumer is
limited by both time and money.

“"Hold on, wait a minute -- do I need a widget for this, or a suite?" “

Personally, if I found that the lion’s share of a software suite was valuable
I would purchase that vs. the individual products with the same feature set.

------
roundsquare
I think you need to distinguish between active and passive widgets.

E.g. An app that lets you find good coffee is an active widget. An app that
blocks SMSs from people you don't like is passive.

People can probably deal with many more passive widgets than active ones.

------
smcnally
tough to quantify answers without more data. if we're talking an iphone
app,it's simpler to answer 1) once we know the expense to build it and the
per-download charge.

@ 2), I actively use a dozen apps; 3 are paid for. 3) not sure; 4) where the
need can be best met with what you've built.

