dhh

25 ms·

241.
by dhh 18y ago
Let me give you a scoop, then: Lots of 37signals code is not in Rails, either. We run Solr for search. We use a C-based poller for Campfire. We call out to ImageMagick for transformations of images. Most successful LAMP sites use software f
242.
by dhh 18y ago
Now where's the TC retraction? (oh, forgot, there's no link-bait in boring stuff like accuracy)
243.
by dhh 18y ago
Actually, our primary metric is profit. But you're otherwise completely correct. We're interested in growing profit, growing customers, and growing influence the best we can. If that happens to lead to a billion-dollar company, awesome. But
244.
by dhh 18y ago
So someone is arrogant when you don't agree with them? And you don't even have to know what they're saying to make that call, you just have to read a three-word summary? What a unique path to expanding your horizon.
245.
by dhh 18y ago
I fully agree that different businesses require different levels of input to make it work. But this crowd seems to be mostly in the "web business" area, so I think our example is at the very least relevant. And we're saying here's an exampl
246.
by dhh 18y ago
Most restaurant chains didn't start as chains, they started just as that single restaurant. Most big businesses didn't start big, they started small. But that's again off topic. I do agree that the startup term is most frequently associated
247.
by dhh 18y ago
I think that's a hijacking of the word that's not helpful at all. And I don't think that pg would argue that you can only call yourself a startup if you're going for VC funding and a sale or IPO. If so, there's an awful lot of tech companie
248.
by dhh 18y ago
I think that's a pretty narrow definition of a startup. Also, there are plenty of businesses that start out small and then grow very large over time. Actually, most large businesses took a long time to get there. Say like foot locker or Zap
249.
by dhh 18y ago
I think the reason for that is more one of risk. Starting a new company is a lot more risky than being an employee of one. And if you have a family to support, you're less likely to be willing to take on big risk. So I absolutely agree that
250.
by dhh 18y ago
You're exactly right. Startup School was a great way to collect some thoughts that had been scattered for a while. A real energy boost.
251.
by dhh 18y ago
You might want to read http://gettingreal.37signals.com/ch01_Caveats_disclaimers_an... as an explanation for the style taken in the book.
252.
by dhh 18y ago
Which is a great argument for why we turned down the 30+ venture capitalists who came knocking on our door. We weren't interested in those kind of setups. And I wish more people who think through exactly those implications: Getting a tradit
253.
by dhh 18y ago
Why do I have to go out and do another startup? I don't work at a startup, I work at a company. I think this mentality is a big part of what's wrong with the startup culture in the Bay area. This notion that it's inevitable that you have to
254.
by dhh 18y ago
I actually really like the Bay area as pleasant place to be. My argument is that you shouldn't move there to start a company of the product/price/profit variety. And this doesn't really have anything to do with cost. 37signals is a multi-mi
255.
by dhh 18y ago
Investors can make money the same way founders can: Dividends. But yeah, that's a slow, boring way of earning a return in the eyes of some. It's not nearly as spectacular as a 10-100x return from a sale.
256.
by dhh 18y ago
Not really, actually. This is in part why we turned down 30 VCs, but were interested in getting involved with Bezos. He's as interested as we are in making this a company that'll be around for 20 years. (And should that turn out not to be t