7 ms·
There seems to be a common assumption that building things for people in SF is a mistake. Targeting early adopters is not bad -- almost by definition, your firs
by paul 19y ago
There seems to be a common assumption that building things for people in SF is a mistake. Targeting early adopters is not bad -- almost by definition, your first users will be early adopters.
The important question is: Is this something that can grow to include the larger population, or will it remain forever niche? If it's something that will eventually spread to the rest of the world, then living in the SF "echo-chamber" is actually a big advantage -- you get a clearer view of the future. This also one of the reasons why many innovations come out of universities -- they also have a "future world" aspect to them (for example, I was using the web in 1994, but "regular" people had never heard of it and had no use for it).
Unfortunately, answering that question is very difficult. Early cell phones provide a wonderful example of this -- the market predictions were off by orders of magnitude.
- brlewis 19y agoI thought this article was about your important question. When it comes to hitting a wall after the early adopters, the first thing I think of is photo sharing. Wouldn't you think that would be one of the most widely-used services? Yet on Quantcast flickr shows 1/10 the monthly unique visitors of yahoo.com. In the top 100, only flickr, photobucket, and (arguably) facebook are photo-sharing sites. Shouldn't photo sharing have a wider appeal than blogging?