5 ms·

We're working on a startup with an app that functions very similarly to the Sparks feature of Google+. The app will recommend new things for you to read and wat

We're working on a startup with an app that functions very similarly to the Sparks feature of Google+. The app will recommend new things for you to read and watch based on your interests (which are stored long-term, but can be ordered, edited, removed). Now that Google+ has a very similar feature in Sparks, I need to think long and hard on whether to continue with the idea. (We are a small team with three developers and a couple other members.) Do you think we should continue to work on this? Would you use something like Google Sparks as a stand-alone Website or mobile app? If we continue, what would be significant differentiating functionalities that Google can't easily copy and deploy? (I am considering showing a different style of recommended results from Google Sparks, e.g. long-term, evergreen articles versus newsflash, but of course Google can do that too.) I am torn right now. Thanks a bunch for any ideas and opinions on this.

true_religion 15y ago
Ditto, I had a side project that was evolving in the same direction as the way Google circles' deals with photosharing. I had heard of circles previously when they leaked things last year, but I assumed it would be vapourware or a half-start like Buzz or Wave. Now that they have actually come out with the product, I'm going to have to pivot away to plan B.
revorad 15y ago
If you're a startup building another social network, I think the question to ask yourself is: what's our business model? Unless you are well connected in the valley, have insane traction already, have boatloads of cash, don't like or need money or are doing it for charity, it's not a startup, it's just a hobby. I think the smart thing to do now is ride the social networking wave and build something on top of it. Think Zynga, not Facebook.
- nopinsight 15y ago
  No, we're not building another social network. This will be an app to help people follow their favorite topics. Think RSS, but filter by topics instead of websites. Or think Reddit, but with only links on your favorite topics. (The topics can be more fine-grained and flexible than putting existing subreddits together.) Of course, there will be social components on it, but the key functionality is the links to interesting articles/videos/books instead of chattering with your friends.
  - revorad 15y ago
    Can I try it? If there was something good like this, I would probably use it. Sparks doesn't do anything interesting right now. It's like Google search results but from a tiny subset of the web, so at least right now, you need not worry about it.
    - nopinsight 15y ago
      Thanks for the interest and the reply. :-) When the product is more ready, I'll definitely let you know.
jarin 15y ago
On one hand, there are always going to be people who don't get on Google+, and Sparks is very basic so there's always room for someone to do it better. On the other hand, I'm not sure it would be possible to make any money on it, other than getting acquired. I don't know that people would pay money for something like Sparks.
colinplamondon 15y ago
Don't be concerned because Google is competing. Be concerned because everyone I've talked to agrees that Sparks sucks, and is by far the weakest part of Google+.
- nopinsight 15y ago
  Can you please elaborate on this? How does Sparks suck? It's gonna be great to know some more details so we can avoid bad design decisions and possible product failure. Your comment would be appreciated.
  - ollerac 15y ago
    I haven't used Sparks, but I can say this: my primary use for a social network isn't discovering new content. There are already so many awesome ways of doing that. Google Reader or StumbleUpon or Reddit or Delicious seem like better ways of discovering new and interesting content about a certain topic. But maybe Sparks will succeed because it will be a lot simpler to use than these other options and it will be built into some people's primary social network. Here's a quote about Sparks from the Wired article on Google+: The signals that Google looks for in determining Sparks content is freshness, a visual component (videos will rank highly), and the degree to which the content is virally spreading on the net. http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/06/inside-google-plus-social/all/1 http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/06/inside-google-plus-so...
  - edcrfv 15y ago
    It throws up a bunch of content out there when I choose a spark. I don't know how they rank the content or how relevant it is to my spark. For example, I tried "Soccer" and it threw up a bunch of results - one them was a link to http://kelviniransomes.blogspot.com/2011/06/eastern-district-soccer-league.html http://kelviniransomes.blogspot.com/2011/06/eastern-district.... I'd imagined that when you add a spark, you get a bunch of stuff grouped under various categories and various types of information like News, Companies, Products, Blogs, etc. And in case of Soccer, I'd have wanted to see scores, league standings, etc. Basically be intelligent about the topic.
- 15y ago

true_religion 15y ago

Ditto, I had a side project that was evolving in the same direction as the way Google circles' deals with photosharing. I had heard of circles previously when they leaked things last year, but I assumed it would be vapourware or a half-start like Buzz or Wave. Now that they have actually come out with the product, I'm going to have to pivot away to plan B.

revorad 15y ago

If you're a startup building another social network, I think the question to ask yourself is: what's our business model? Unless you are well connected in the valley, have insane traction already, have boatloads of cash, don't like or need money or are doing it for charity, it's not a startup, it's just a hobby. I think the smart thing to do now is ride the social networking wave and build something on top of it. Think Zynga, not Facebook.

nopinsight 15y ago
No, we're not building another social network. This will be an app to help people follow their favorite topics. Think RSS, but filter by topics instead of websites. Or think Reddit, but with only links on your favorite topics. (The topics can be more fine-grained and flexible than putting existing subreddits together.) Of course, there will be social components on it, but the key functionality is the links to interesting articles/videos/books instead of chattering with your friends.
- revorad 15y ago
  Can I try it? If there was something good like this, I would probably use it. Sparks doesn't do anything interesting right now. It's like Google search results but from a tiny subset of the web, so at least right now, you need not worry about it.
  - nopinsight 15y ago
    Thanks for the interest and the reply. :-) When the product is more ready, I'll definitely let you know.

jarin 15y ago

On one hand, there are always going to be people who don't get on Google+, and Sparks is very basic so there's always room for someone to do it better. On the other hand, I'm not sure it would be possible to make any money on it, other than getting acquired. I don't know that people would pay money for something like Sparks.

colinplamondon 15y ago

Don't be concerned because Google is competing. Be concerned because everyone I've talked to agrees that Sparks sucks, and is by far the weakest part of Google+.

nopinsight 15y ago
Can you please elaborate on this? How does Sparks suck? It's gonna be great to know some more details so we can avoid bad design decisions and possible product failure. Your comment would be appreciated.
- ollerac 15y ago
  I haven't used Sparks, but I can say this: my primary use for a social network isn't discovering new content. There are already so many awesome ways of doing that. Google Reader or StumbleUpon or Reddit or Delicious seem like better ways of discovering new and interesting content about a certain topic. But maybe Sparks will succeed because it will be a lot simpler to use than these other options and it will be built into some people's primary social network. Here's a quote about Sparks from the Wired article on Google+: The signals that Google looks for in determining Sparks content is freshness, a visual component (videos will rank highly), and the degree to which the content is virally spreading on the net. http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/06/inside-google-plus-social/all/1 http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/06/inside-google-plus-so...
- edcrfv 15y ago
  It throws up a bunch of content out there when I choose a spark. I don't know how they rank the content or how relevant it is to my spark. For example, I tried "Soccer" and it threw up a bunch of results - one them was a link to http://kelviniransomes.blogspot.com/2011/06/eastern-district-soccer-league.html http://kelviniransomes.blogspot.com/2011/06/eastern-district.... I'd imagined that when you add a spark, you get a bunch of stuff grouped under various categories and various types of information like News, Companies, Products, Blogs, etc. And in case of Soccer, I'd have wanted to see scores, league standings, etc. Basically be intelligent about the topic.
15y ago