

Some Startups Just Don't Need Starting - riklomas
http://mashable.com/2008/07/20/ycombinator-startups/

======
pg
2008: You shouldn't try to build web-based Office alternatives because Google,
Adobe, and Zoho are already doing it.

=

1998: You shouldn't try to build new search engines because Lycos, Excite, and
Altavista are already doing it.

Any argument that proves it was a bad idea to start Google is probably a bad
argument.

~~~
tptacek
Ok, but Google didn't _just_ start a search engine to compete with Lycos. They
struck oil with a new approach to search.

It's hard to say "any argument that proves it was a bad idea to start Excite"
because, you know, Ferraris and hookers and coke and all that. A great idea.

But if you're taking on Microsoft, Google and Adobe, you'd better have an
awesome idea, and you probably don't need the "this is a good market"
encouragement.

My point is that you're both taking cheap shots.

~~~
pg
Google didn't just "strike oil." The idea that they discovered a magical new
algorithm that guaranteed their success is an urban legend. The main thing
that made Google different from the portals was that they actually cared about
doing search well. (When Google was started, their predecessors were trying
hard to get people to stop calling them "search engines.") So there is plenty
of room for a new startup to have the same sort of advantage over Google etc
in web-based apps that Google did over preceding search engines.

~~~
tptacek
My understanding is, Google didn't start as a "search engine that cared about
doing search well". It started as a company to capitalize on Page and Brin's
doctoral work. Their original plan was to be an arms dealer for other search
engines. It was an idea first.

~~~
pg
"search engine that cared about doing search well"

That quote is not a quote, is it?

Thomas, I'm done with this thread. I'm sure you mean well (at least, I'll give
you the benefit of the doubt), but I've noticed before that arguing with you
is exactly like arguing with a troll. The defining quality of both being
finding oneself always saying "No, what I _said_ was...."

~~~
tptacek
Duly noted.

------
rantfoil
Nobody reigns forever. Rome falls. The advantages of being small and agile
can't be understated.

~~~
endlessvoid94
don't you mean they can't be overstated?

~~~
rantfoil
LOL. Yes. Typo attributable to lack of sleep. =)

------
mattmaroon
I have to side with PG design. Most of Google's properties have a mediocre
user experience at best. I'm not so sure it's their Achilles heel (at least
for search) but it's definitely an area where a startup could crush them.

------
randome
Your analogy is weak at best, -- office suites aren't really an algorithmic
problem ... Google beat out Lycos, Excite and Altavista because it created a
better algorithm for indexing and organizing information. Office suites are
about features -- lots of them, thus entering the market competitively
requires man power not intelligence. Is there room for improvement...
certainly. But it is incremental improvement. I just don't think its the type
of area where some killer new idea can shake up the entire space.

------
endlessvoid94
As always, history will judge whether these ideas are good or bad. Reading
about it on a blog is not going to change my mind.

Worse, if it DOES change my mind, what have I gained? Nothing. I'd rather
discover it was a bad idea because I tried it and failed, not because someone
"told me so".

------
Giorgi
Nice to see, someone agrees with me :)

