3 ms·

Whatever tech scene SF may have had died with the dotcom 1.0 collapse. What has existed since then is various forms of ad and surveillance web apps masquerading

Whatever tech scene SF may have had died with the dotcom 1.0 collapse. What has existed since then is various forms of ad and surveillance web apps masquerading as something more interesting. Actual SV always was and remains much more interesting, though perhaps less so than the 90s heyday. The fact the associated vibe difference is so perfectly demonstrated by the state of their airports is quite brilliant. Edit to add: for those in denial, SF was HQ for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pets.com https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pets.com

splap 1y ago
dotcom was more SV than SF
oersted 1y ago
I’ve had three long trips to the Bay area a in the last couple of years. It’s so interesting to hear locals talking about SF and SV as different worlds and making such a big deal about driving over. They are less than an hour apart (roughly) and it’s all a connected continuum. It’s trivial to move between them several times a day for different appointments. I thought people were much more used to long drives than in EU, I suppose it varies by region.
cratermoon 1y ago
At some point, after the dot-com collapse but around the time of the Facebook IPO, SF (and SV) started to attract people who cared more about the money than the tech itself. Creating a software product was seen not as a goal in itself, but as a means to make money. The actual thing, SaaS, social network, shopping, trading, whatever, didn't matter. All that mattered was that it could make money, the more the better. Of course for now the AI companies are bleeding money, as it costs more per user than they charge, but that will change as soon as they accomplish the necessary lock-in.
- pdimitar 1y ago
  > Creating a software product was seen not as a goal in itself, but as a means to make money. You mean to tell me there are companies where creating software by itself is not frowned upon?! Where do I apply?
  - jjav 1y ago
    You apply back in the 1990s
jandrewrogers 1y ago
The dotcom boom happened in Silicon Valley, not San Francisco. All of the action was in the Santa Clara valley. Things moved toward San Francisco during the social media boom that happened many years later.
- quesera 1y ago
  SF city was very active with software/web/media startups in dotcom 1.0.
  - jandrewrogers 1y ago
    It may have been "very active" but it was a small part of the overall scene. I lived up and down the peninsula throughout the dotcom boom. SF was on the periphery of tech during the 1990s, the major migration up there happened in the years after the bust.
    - quesera 1y ago
      I was there too, and that is not what I saw. (Caveat: I'm thinking of the 1997-2000 period. Netscape IPOed in mid 1995, the bust was early 2000, so that covers the last 2/3rds of the first wave, but not all of it.) My observations at the time: dotcom-1.0 was split pretty evenly between SF and SV, but there were clear differences in focus. Hardware and legacy stuff was all in SV, software/web/media was substantially all in SF. Dotcom-2.0 (social media/SaaS/etc) was entirely in SF. I'd agree that SF owned 2.0 and shared 1.0, but 1.0 in the city was extremely busy with founders, employees, launches, leases, and money. I worked up and down the peninsula. Investors and data centers (VCs and DCs) were down south -- the latter with one exception: 200 Paul Ave, although itself at the extreme southern edge of SF. Founders, staff, offices, and everything else were in the city. I worked at one company who opened an office in the valley, but we literally couldn't hire people down there (Santa Clara), and couldn't get people to move there. All the action was in SF, for a software/web/media business.
      - jjav 1y ago
thomassmith65 1y ago
It wasn't the dot-com bubble popping in 2000. It was the 'AppStore gold rush': July 10, 2008 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple)

splap 1y ago

dotcom was more SV than SF

oersted 1y ago

I’ve had three long trips to the Bay area a in the last couple of years. It’s so interesting to hear locals talking about SF and SV as different worlds and making such a big deal about driving over. They are less than an hour apart (roughly) and it’s all a connected continuum. It’s trivial to move between them several times a day for different appointments. I thought people were much more used to long drives than in EU, I suppose it varies by region.

cratermoon 1y ago

At some point, after the dot-com collapse but around the time of the Facebook IPO, SF (and SV) started to attract people who cared more about the money than the tech itself. Creating a software product was seen not as a goal in itself, but as a means to make money. The actual thing, SaaS, social network, shopping, trading, whatever, didn't matter. All that mattered was that it could make money, the more the better. Of course for now the AI companies are bleeding money, as it costs more per user than they charge, but that will change as soon as they accomplish the necessary lock-in.

pdimitar 1y ago
> Creating a software product was seen not as a goal in itself, but as a means to make money. You mean to tell me there are companies where creating software by itself is not frowned upon?! Where do I apply?
- jjav 1y ago
  You apply back in the 1990s

jandrewrogers 1y ago

The dotcom boom happened in Silicon Valley, not San Francisco. All of the action was in the Santa Clara valley. Things moved toward San Francisco during the social media boom that happened many years later.

quesera 1y ago
SF city was very active with software/web/media startups in dotcom 1.0.
- jandrewrogers 1y ago
  It may have been "very active" but it was a small part of the overall scene. I lived up and down the peninsula throughout the dotcom boom. SF was on the periphery of tech during the 1990s, the major migration up there happened in the years after the bust.
  - quesera 1y ago
    I was there too, and that is not what I saw. (Caveat: I'm thinking of the 1997-2000 period. Netscape IPOed in mid 1995, the bust was early 2000, so that covers the last 2/3rds of the first wave, but not all of it.) My observations at the time: dotcom-1.0 was split pretty evenly between SF and SV, but there were clear differences in focus. Hardware and legacy stuff was all in SV, software/web/media was substantially all in SF. Dotcom-2.0 (social media/SaaS/etc) was entirely in SF. I'd agree that SF owned 2.0 and shared 1.0, but 1.0 in the city was extremely busy with founders, employees, launches, leases, and money. I worked up and down the peninsula. Investors and data centers (VCs and DCs) were down south -- the latter with one exception: 200 Paul Ave, although itself at the extreme southern edge of SF. Founders, staff, offices, and everything else were in the city. I worked at one company who opened an office in the valley, but we literally couldn't hire people down there (Santa Clara), and couldn't get people to move there. All the action was in SF, for a software/web/media business.
    - jjav 1y ago

thomassmith65 1y ago

It wasn't the dot-com bubble popping in 2000. It was the 'AppStore gold rush': July 10, 2008 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple)