First you need to add a space (or two as my preference) for "video.Make" on your landing page.
The second thing and I think the reason why you were rejected from YC was you never showed how your application would increases your users chances of interacting with their idols. I think one of the questions that was part of the YC application was "is your product a chicken and egg thing".
How did you answer this question? What makes "tweets" from "Chance" that much more discernible from other twitter posts.
In your video you promised a better way to get your idols attention but you never explained how.
It would probably make sense for YC to contact late applicants once they have done the interviews. They've mentioned before, they can only take on so many startups per batch and if there are enough after the interview, it really doesn't make much sense to bring on more. That is, unless they are so good, it would be foolish for them to let other incubators get to them first.
As someone who has tangentially interacted with YC, I seriously doubt that is the reason. YC cares about the team above all, then followed by customers/users/traction (but really, it's the team). The addressable market is not very high on their list of concerns. Though it certainly is a factor, I don't think it is the reason for rejection.
One question I have is how well does the team know each other? What are some of your team members' accomplishments? Honestly YC doesn't care very much about all the degrees you have (I would even argue that the fact that there are 5 degrees among the 3 of you is a negative signal for YC because it indicates credentialism, but that's just my opinion).
I've been studying Atlassian for some time and I really admire their approach to enterprise and this is why I think they have been successful so far:
The majority of their tools can be installed on site. SAAS for enterprise is a lot harder to sell.
Most of their tools are built with Java so things are self-contained which makes it easier to install. Also their installations will most likely not need root access. Anybody who knows enterprise knows root access is usually clamped down in enterprise.
Their pricing model encourages a bottom up sales approach. Traditional sales channel for enterprise is top down where you go after execs, senior management, etc. and work your way down. IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, etc. can afford the top down approach. For most startups, this would be impossible. By making it very affordable for disgruntled employees/departments to use their product, they are able to create internal advocates for their product if it does make their life easier.
tldr; Don't make SAAS. Try to make your tool installable with non-root/admin access. Make it very affordable for individuals and small teams because they will become internal advocates if your product is good.
While I do think being installable on site helps, I don't think that is the primary advantage Atlassian has over other software companies.
In my opinion it has everything to do with the market. They build products for a market which likes good tools, has no problem putting them into their workflow, and telling all their peers about how awesome their tools are.
Contrast that to Zendesk which is largely a customer service tool. In a large company, customer service is largely run business majors who are more concerned with risk of process changes, than they are with (potential) cost savings from better software.
Nahh, there are PLENTY of enterprise customers who will never move to the cloud with sensitive data. So software installation at the customers site is a must for many of them, especially the larger enterprises.
Sure, the small web startup of 10 people doesn't care where their employees data is, a 100k employee enterprise very well does.
I had to install JIRA trial on my Windows, and decided to give it a go on a debian-vm through virtualbox. It was smooth - downloaded ~200mb bin file, ran it (not root), and installed it. Then all other updates (as you've said) came as .jar packages and installed them while it was running.
As a C/C++ programmer I felt impressed :) Oh and there is lovely API to talk to the system (unlike say... other systems that I won't name here for which you have to spent 10K only for the API).
Yeah but do these downloaded software meet the following criteria:
- Insanely cheap ($10) where an employee would be willing to pay for it out their own pocket.
- The software actually makes the employee/departments life easier.
- The downloaded version doesn't contain any crippled support.
Atlassian's whole approach to enterprise is to create internal advocates. They don't care about the revenue that is generated from a $10 sale. They just want to plant seeds in companies so that when they do end up purchasing more than 10 user licenses, they know they can charge a shit load more.
I'm not sure if Atlassian is the first to implement this pricing model, but I believe it is the future for most enterprise sales.
I had the same reaction as you and I did a search for 23 in this thread and nobody else is talking about this. Has Zuckerberg really skewed a generation. The odds of you making it big at the age is insanely low.
Taking 7 years to get good at something is actually a smart thing to do. The best thing to do is always look for a room where you are not the smartest so you can learn and when you can't find anymore rooms, you'll know it's your time.
Yeah I think they realize, like most vendors, that most people don't even come remotely close to using that much bandwidth. Even using them as a proxy for nextflix will probably just end up being 300G a month.
My product is aimed at the enterprise and I actually thought about applying to YC and may still, but it was really off putting seeing the video requirement. I really don't understand the purpose of it. Once you know my name you'll be able to find my linkedin profile with my picture:
I like to think I'm pretty articulate but I really hate speaking into the air with no visible recipient. It is the same reason I despise leaving voice messages. Maybe their is a technical term for this, who knows.
The problem that I've found when I was trying to port my installer to FreeBSD was their make doesn't like GNU Makefiles. Not sure when they diverged from one another so having Make everywhere, doesn't necessary mean your Makefile will work everywhere.
I liked how security centric FreeBSD was but they seem to be anti-enterprise friendly. The process to install Oracle Java was painful and EnterpriseDB didn't even bother creating a Postgres installer for it. Maybe the freedom that the BSD license offers, is making their environment too stagnant when compared to GNU and Linux.
> The problem that I've found when I was trying to port my installer to FreeBSD was their make doesn't like GNU Makefiles. Not sure when they diverged from one another so having Make everywhere, doesn't necessary mean your Makefile will work everywhere.
As with many other utilities, you can always run "gmake" for GNU make. If you can get what you need to do done with portable make, by all means do so, but if you need to depend on GNU make, it's widely available.
FreeBSD tries not to install much third party software with the default install. Everything is available in ports/pkg. The things included in the default install usually BSD licensed/BSD versions. Personally I prefer having third party software disassociated from the core operating system. For me at least, it makes tracking critical updates a lot easier.