4 ms·

Github would be better to write a campfire clone in a day or so, and roll it out. I'm betting github has a larger userbase than campfire, so what would be the

Github would be better to write a campfire clone in a day or so, and roll it out. I'm betting github has a larger userbase than campfire, so what would be the point in paying a few million for campfire?

adrinavarro 13y ago
The talent and know-how? I thought we were already past the "why buy it if you can copy it".
- theknown99 13y ago
  "Talent and know how"? Seriously? Is writing a webchat client some black dark art? There's nothing much you need to know to write a webchat client. Campfire isn't high volume, so it doesn't need to be too efficient either. Last time I checked campfire processes a few messages a second. Heck you could rewrite it in PHP/MySQL if you were that way inclined. Campfire didn't succeed because it was a good product. It succeeded because they marketed it to their "following" who bought into it.
  - josefresco 13y ago
    You could levy that same criticism on any company who leveraged an existing success to market and sell a less than stellar product or service. Many times people will see a product or company and think "how simple, I could have made that ... why did they succeed?" Everyone has assets they bring to the table that help them succeed. For some it means they can create and sell a less than stellar product because they have existing leverage in a market that give them an advantage an average "Joe" wouldn't.
  - timjahn 13y ago
    Your arm chair quarterbacking is adding oh so much to the conversation. Are we really back to the childish argument of "this is so easy to build, would just take a few minutes"?
    - theknown99 13y ago
      I'm not sure it's quite arm chair quarterbacking. I've written a few webchat clients. The point is, if you bought campfire, all you'd really be buying is the existing customer base.
  - xutopia 13y ago
    When campfire came out there was no competition.
- redler 13y ago
  > The talent and know-how Actually, they state that any sale or spinoff of the de-emphasized products would not include employees.

adrinavarro 13y ago

The talent and know-how? I thought we were already past the "why buy it if you can copy it".

theknown99 13y ago
"Talent and know how"? Seriously? Is writing a webchat client some black dark art? There's nothing much you need to know to write a webchat client. Campfire isn't high volume, so it doesn't need to be too efficient either. Last time I checked campfire processes a few messages a second. Heck you could rewrite it in PHP/MySQL if you were that way inclined. Campfire didn't succeed because it was a good product. It succeeded because they marketed it to their "following" who bought into it.
- josefresco 13y ago
  You could levy that same criticism on any company who leveraged an existing success to market and sell a less than stellar product or service. Many times people will see a product or company and think "how simple, I could have made that ... why did they succeed?" Everyone has assets they bring to the table that help them succeed. For some it means they can create and sell a less than stellar product because they have existing leverage in a market that give them an advantage an average "Joe" wouldn't.
- timjahn 13y ago
  Your arm chair quarterbacking is adding oh so much to the conversation. Are we really back to the childish argument of "this is so easy to build, would just take a few minutes"?
  - theknown99 13y ago
    I'm not sure it's quite arm chair quarterbacking. I've written a few webchat clients. The point is, if you bought campfire, all you'd really be buying is the existing customer base.
- xutopia 13y ago
  When campfire came out there was no competition.
redler 13y ago
> The talent and know-how Actually, they state that any sale or spinoff of the de-emphasized products would not include employees.