3 ms·
Before Uber there was an app I could use to book a taxi. That's one of the main reasons I don't think their app was innovative. > This usually took at least 30
by IanCal 8y ago
Before Uber there was an app I could use to book a taxi. That's one of the main reasons I don't think their app was innovative.
> This usually took at least 30-40m, if they arrived at all.
Not for me, I would and still do get cars faster using other firms. Uber says they're two minutes away and they come ten minutes later.
The only reason I use Uber is I get receipts I can push to my expenses.
- kelnos 8y agoThat's fair, but understand that your city's taxi experience isn't necessarily typical, and also that Uber has the ability to make the experience nearly identical in all markets where they operate (that alone has value). For most markets, that turns out to be higher quality than the local option, but every now and then (like in your case), the reverse is true.
- IanCal 8y agoI've not said they don't have value, what I've said was the app wasn't innovative. To me it cannot be because something almost identical existed before, and it isn't a huge shift from telling someone where I am. If the innovation is being a non-terrible taxi firm, then I think I stand by my point that it's because they were big enough to ignore the local rules
- JudgeWapner 8y agodo you think big hits in tech are merely the first one to code the idea? proper execution and business maneuvering are arguably more important than being the first "app to book a taxi".
- IanCal 8y ago> do you think big hits in tech are merely the first one to code the idea? No. Nor have I suggested anything like that. If they're not the first to have an app like they started with, why would you describe it as innovative? I think their important business decisions were ignoring local rules (as I've said) and building a brand.