3 ms·

Wait, I'm confused. What's the point of this post? A meta-discussion about fallout from unmet expectations compared to koolaid-drinking trends? Don't you peop

by bfioca 19y ago

Wait, I'm confused. What's the point of this post? A meta-discussion about fallout from unmet expectations compared to koolaid-drinking trends? Don't you people have stuff to do?

raganwald 19y ago
What has more impact on the adoption of technologies: its technical merits or social behaviour?
- bfioca 19y ago
  I'd like to think it's a good combination of both. New technology with technical merit arrives, smart people latch on and build things with it, improving the knowledge base and library depth. Then, more people flock on as they follow the leaders.
  - deleted 19y ago
    [deleted]
- michaelneale 19y ago
  Totally social behavior (out of those 2). History shows technical merits ALWAYS lose out. Its almost a law, I have no idea why.
- pchristensen 19y ago
  I think technical people believe in the free market too much without understanding all of the requirements. One of them is that everyone has perfect knowledge of all options. If someone doesn't know about you, they can't choose you. This is why marketing adds so much value - you become an option and your technical merits have a chance to shine. If you market something crappy, you'll only succeed if no one knows about the better alternative.
mixmax 19y ago
The point of the post is to point out some basic psychology and human nature. And I think it is quite accurate too. Note that PG and DHH could just as easily have been anyone else, the article just uses them as examples to prove a point. And frankly I think that a lot of readers of YC news could do good with some insight into psychology and what makes people tick. It is a large part of a startups success. (note: I don't intend to offend anyone, it is simply humble advice which you may of course ignore at your own discretion)
- bfioca 19y ago
  I guess I can see that. I'm just put off a bit by the way it's worded. I suppose that's the point, though.

by bfioca 19y ago

Wait, I'm confused. What's the point of this post? A meta-discussion about fallout from unmet expectations compared to koolaid-drinking trends? Don't you people have stuff to do?

raganwald 19y ago

What has more impact on the adoption of technologies: its technical merits or social behaviour?

bfioca 19y ago
I'd like to think it's a good combination of both. New technology with technical merit arrives, smart people latch on and build things with it, improving the knowledge base and library depth. Then, more people flock on as they follow the leaders.
- deleted 19y ago
  [deleted]
michaelneale 19y ago
Totally social behavior (out of those 2). History shows technical merits ALWAYS lose out. Its almost a law, I have no idea why.
pchristensen 19y ago
I think technical people believe in the free market too much without understanding all of the requirements. One of them is that everyone has perfect knowledge of all options. If someone doesn't know about you, they can't choose you. This is why marketing adds so much value - you become an option and your technical merits have a chance to shine. If you market something crappy, you'll only succeed if no one knows about the better alternative.

mixmax 19y ago

The point of the post is to point out some basic psychology and human nature. And I think it is quite accurate too. Note that PG and DHH could just as easily have been anyone else, the article just uses them as examples to prove a point. And frankly I think that a lot of readers of YC news could do good with some insight into psychology and what makes people tick. It is a large part of a startups success. (note: I don't intend to offend anyone, it is simply humble advice which you may of course ignore at your own discretion)

bfioca 19y ago
I guess I can see that. I'm just put off a bit by the way it's worded. I suppose that's the point, though.