5 ms·

Honestly, this makes no sense. It doesn't matter how famous you are - if your product sucks, people won't use it. Look at Ashton Kutcher's Blah Girls. It's a

Honestly, this makes no sense. It doesn't matter how famous you are - if your product sucks, people won't use it. Look at Ashton Kutcher's Blah Girls. It's a miserable failure - even though he's much, much, much more famous than a mere Kevin Rose - because no one really needed to see cartoon girls do a weak TMZ imitation. I think people like to chalk up Digg's success to Kevin's "celebrity", where in reality, he's a nobody and Digg actually is a really, really good product for the niche it's serving.

bastian 17y ago
I think one not necessarily has to do with the other. In this example Kevin simply used his existing network for the launch of Digg. I agree with you that Digg is a great product for the niche it is serving. That's why it is successful. Pownce on the other hand wasn't a good product and had limited success despite Kevin's efforts to push it.
- mikeryan 17y ago
  I actually thought Pownce was an interesting product I'm actually kind of surprised it never took off, except it was too "Twitter-like" so it never got the network it needed to gain critical mass.
  - teej 17y ago
    Pownce's failure had very little to do with it being "Twitter-like". It failed because it didn't solve a problem that real people had. Launching a product that is similar to popular incumbents isn't a negative feature. In many cases, it can help your unique selling point. Mint: Quicken but online and great UI. Hacker News: Digg for startups. Digg: Slashdot by the people.
    - RyanMcGreal 17y ago
      >Pownce's failure had very little to do with it being "Twitter-like". It failed because it didn't solve a problem that real people had. What problem does Twitter solve? (Not a rhetorical question)
      - unalone 17y ago
        It gives them a way to quickly communicate feelings, and to see what other people are saying quickly. Because it's so short, you can follow a lot of news without being overwhelmed.
        sjs 17y ago
        Async communication is key to twitter. It's also cool that you can tweet by any method anyone has ever thought of, from almost any device that can send any sort of data whatsoever. The API has helped them greatly. I'm sure that someone, somewhere has a computer that transcribes short voice messages that can be left by phone. If not they will by the time I hit "reply" ... there should be a rule #34 for twitter. * e-mail * sms (key for reaching mobile people w/o smartphones) * web browsers * native apps / widgets And then services like twitpic built around twitter.
      - elblanco 17y ago
        The problem of people sharing the inanity of their day to as many people as possible. And the problem of people who want to read about the inane things that people do every day.
    - apgwoz 17y ago
      > Pownce's failure had very little to do with it being "Twitter-like". It failed because it didn't solve a problem that real people had. Tell that to Facebook, whom basically added all the features Pownce had (event invites, sharing files, etc) after realizing it was a great idea.
mattmaroon 17y ago
Actually I think it's both. You can make a good product that nobody ever hears of, it happens all the time. You can also make a sucky product that a lot of people hear about and never come back to. Digg was the right product for the right time, but Kevin's celebrity among its target audience was a large part of why it came out on top. It got a quick lead in terms of users and the network effect exacerbated that over time.

bastian 17y ago

I think one not necessarily has to do with the other. In this example Kevin simply used his existing network for the launch of Digg. I agree with you that Digg is a great product for the niche it is serving. That's why it is successful. Pownce on the other hand wasn't a good product and had limited success despite Kevin's efforts to push it.

mikeryan 17y ago
I actually thought Pownce was an interesting product I'm actually kind of surprised it never took off, except it was too "Twitter-like" so it never got the network it needed to gain critical mass.
- teej 17y ago
  Pownce's failure had very little to do with it being "Twitter-like". It failed because it didn't solve a problem that real people had. Launching a product that is similar to popular incumbents isn't a negative feature. In many cases, it can help your unique selling point. Mint: Quicken but online and great UI. Hacker News: Digg for startups. Digg: Slashdot by the people.
  - RyanMcGreal 17y ago
    >Pownce's failure had very little to do with it being "Twitter-like". It failed because it didn't solve a problem that real people had. What problem does Twitter solve? (Not a rhetorical question)
    - unalone 17y ago
      It gives them a way to quickly communicate feelings, and to see what other people are saying quickly. Because it's so short, you can follow a lot of news without being overwhelmed.
      - sjs 17y ago
        Async communication is key to twitter. It's also cool that you can tweet by any method anyone has ever thought of, from almost any device that can send any sort of data whatsoever. The API has helped them greatly. I'm sure that someone, somewhere has a computer that transcribes short voice messages that can be left by phone. If not they will by the time I hit "reply" ... there should be a rule #34 for twitter. * e-mail * sms (key for reaching mobile people w/o smartphones) * web browsers * native apps / widgets And then services like twitpic built around twitter.
    - elblanco 17y ago
      The problem of people sharing the inanity of their day to as many people as possible. And the problem of people who want to read about the inane things that people do every day.
  - apgwoz 17y ago
    > Pownce's failure had very little to do with it being "Twitter-like". It failed because it didn't solve a problem that real people had. Tell that to Facebook, whom basically added all the features Pownce had (event invites, sharing files, etc) after realizing it was a great idea.

mattmaroon 17y ago

Actually I think it's both. You can make a good product that nobody ever hears of, it happens all the time. You can also make a sucky product that a lot of people hear about and never come back to. Digg was the right product for the right time, but Kevin's celebrity among its target audience was a large part of why it came out on top. It got a quick lead in terms of users and the network effect exacerbated that over time.