7 ms·

Slack was built on the foundations of Web 2.0 tools like Socialtext, Jive, Atlassian and others. It's a classic case of profiting from the furrow others have pl

Slack was built on the foundations of Web 2.0 tools like Socialtext, Jive, Atlassian and others. It's a classic case of profiting from the furrow others have ploughed, right place at right time etc. This is a big lesson for startups...like surfing timing is everything - which set, which wave, circumstances...

sagebird 7y ago
The timing thing is always at play, I agree but I’m not buying the narrative that Slack had less work to do because of work done by Socialtext, Jive, Atlassian and others. Whatever desktop technology they use to bundle chrome (eg Electron), yes, they are benefiting from that work a bit and modern browsers in general. But overall I think Slack could have existed in a similar form as a desktop work/chat application in the late 90s or early 2000s using Winforms and Carbon or whatever native desktop kits. It could have been a user friendly irc client with file sharing tailored to teams and workplaces, and it would have done wonderfully, no “standing on shoulders” of Web 2.0 stuff required. In fact I think it would have been an easier path to success if they started in 1999.
- olivermarks 7y ago
  I mentioned the funded tip of the iceberg - there were hundreds of vendors in this space eight years ago, many of whom died or were acquired by larger entities keen to have a collaboration offering. It evolved over time and Slack were the winners, mainly I'd say due to great timing around mobile first maturity
mthoms 7y ago
Interestingly, Flickr (Butterfields' other startup) was one of the companies that helped define the Web 2.0 era. It too, was (at least partially) successful by being in the right place at the right time. That's not meant to be a knock on Butterfield... quite the contrary.
tedmiston 7y ago
What's weird is that Atlassian seemingly just gave up on HipChat at a time when Slack was only just emerging in popularity.

sagebird 7y ago

The timing thing is always at play, I agree but I’m not buying the narrative that Slack had less work to do because of work done by Socialtext, Jive, Atlassian and others. Whatever desktop technology they use to bundle chrome (eg Electron), yes, they are benefiting from that work a bit and modern browsers in general. But overall I think Slack could have existed in a similar form as a desktop work/chat application in the late 90s or early 2000s using Winforms and Carbon or whatever native desktop kits. It could have been a user friendly irc client with file sharing tailored to teams and workplaces, and it would have done wonderfully, no “standing on shoulders” of Web 2.0 stuff required. In fact I think it would have been an easier path to success if they started in 1999.

olivermarks 7y ago
I mentioned the funded tip of the iceberg - there were hundreds of vendors in this space eight years ago, many of whom died or were acquired by larger entities keen to have a collaboration offering. It evolved over time and Slack were the winners, mainly I'd say due to great timing around mobile first maturity

mthoms 7y ago

Interestingly, Flickr (Butterfields' other startup) was one of the companies that helped define the Web 2.0 era. It too, was (at least partially) successful by being in the right place at the right time. That's not meant to be a knock on Butterfield... quite the contrary.

tedmiston 7y ago

What's weird is that Atlassian seemingly just gave up on HipChat at a time when Slack was only just emerging in popularity.