3 ms·

I'd go further. Patents are nice to haves for VCs and investors and look pretty on glossy business plans (look at our shiny algorithms and wireframes!). Don't b

by rcmorin 17y ago

I'd go further. Patents are nice to haves for VCs and investors and look pretty on glossy business plans (look at our shiny algorithms and wireframes!). Don't bet the success of your company on your patent portfolio. The fact is, no startups out there succeed in the long run because of their proprietary technology (think facebook, myspace, youtube, yahoo, google, flickr). Even if something is "rocket science" and very hard to build, it might keep your competition at bay for a while. But once, you're successful, they'll always find a way to do it. So, what can you do? Figure out your sustainable competitive advantage. What is the rocket science that will insulate your startup from big competitors? I think that is the angle worth exploring here.

tom_b 17y ago
Sustainable competitive advantage - excellent phrase. It covers a wider range of possibilities than are implied by rocket science. One of the reasons I originally posted the question is that I'm particularly interested in one of the ideas that YC mentioned in the startup ideas that YC would like to fund, enterprise software 2.0 (http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html see number 5). My experience in that space is that there are a number of companies that are generating huge revenues using software that could be improved via the "build a better mousetrap" methodology. But basically none of that space requires rocket science, unless you include the ability you have as a startup to use more powerful languages and tools than your standard corporate behemoth. Now, that said, using more powerful tools might free you up to innovate in ways other companies can't, similar to how PG has touted Lisp as a big strength for Viaweb . . .
- rcmorin 17y ago
  Tom excellent point. There is a huge market for innovation in the enterprise space. At the financial services company I work for, the average employee uses about 25 applications and has a different username and password for each. And most of these apps are terrible. There is enormous pain in the corporate world and it's an understatement to just build a better mousetrap. Just build something that doesn't suck as bad as their current software; and sell to the business people and upper-middle management decision-makers.

by rcmorin 17y ago

tom_b 17y ago

Sustainable competitive advantage - excellent phrase. It covers a wider range of possibilities than are implied by rocket science. One of the reasons I originally posted the question is that I'm particularly interested in one of the ideas that YC mentioned in the startup ideas that YC would like to fund, enterprise software 2.0 (http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html see number 5). My experience in that space is that there are a number of companies that are generating huge revenues using software that could be improved via the "build a better mousetrap" methodology. But basically none of that space requires rocket science, unless you include the ability you have as a startup to use more powerful languages and tools than your standard corporate behemoth. Now, that said, using more powerful tools might free you up to innovate in ways other companies can't, similar to how PG has touted Lisp as a big strength for Viaweb . . .

rcmorin 17y ago
Tom excellent point. There is a huge market for innovation in the enterprise space. At the financial services company I work for, the average employee uses about 25 applications and has a different username and password for each. And most of these apps are terrible. There is enormous pain in the corporate world and it's an understatement to just build a better mousetrap. Just build something that doesn't suck as bad as their current software; and sell to the business people and upper-middle management decision-makers.