What would happen if someone had the Tesla for databases? What if it had a way to query data that was also vastly better and simpler? (This wasn't mentioned in passing in the comments on our application since we're not ready to show it, but it exists and is reflection of the language.) If you squint you could imagine that taking off and eating a large portion of the market.
Now let's take a random situation: You have a business that makes widgets. You have customers, suppliers, parts, etc. Do you store that information in Word as text? Of course not. You either have a spreadsheet or database, right? Text is great for a novel or a poem... but not for data. That would be crazy.
Currently, the web is still a big collection of text documents. How optimal is that? Deeply sub-optimal. The number of people going to the Google homepage is declining because people are now just going directly to the database that represents what they're looking for. Looking to buy a home? You go to Zillow or Trulia and query their database. People want data, not text. 95% of the web wants to be data.
Now imagine if that company mentioned before had significant market share. The authentication is common across all of these databases, they all have the same API (the language), and so instead of appearing as many databases, it appears as one large database of everything. Suddenly a network effect kicks in and if you have something you want to be discovered (which is what the web consists of) it makes sense to join in.
The next Google won't be better text search but instead something completely different -- it will be data. And the web will become essentially a massive database. I don't know who will get there, no one can know, or how it will happen, but it will happen; it's waiting to happen.
I can't comment on the technical implementation, but just from visiting your website I think you are doing yourself a disservice by having the up-front, immediate form of communication be a negative comment about traditional SQL.
Traditional SQL stands up extremely well to modern use cases, and tons of use cases never require the magnitude of data at which other solutions become pragmatic. As a result, it's important to consider traditional RDBMSs with respect, acknowledging that they are extremely resilient to tons of use cases, schema or schema-less situations, distributed access, etc. etc., and active development is making them better and better all the time.
By basically saying, "put away your boring old SQL database grandpa, it's time for something better" you're giving sort of an immature and technologically hasty vibe that's going to alienate people.
Your technology may be amazing, but people often don't respond to things that present in this "your whole way of thinking is totally wrong" sort of way.
Thanks for that -- I had no idea it could be taken that way. I meant for it to come across as, "Here's something exciting and new." I'll look into changing that; I definitely don't want to come across as disrespectful. Thanks again.
You're not the only one to accidentally give off that vibe. I remember reading this [0] article about "DevOps 2.0" and my jaw dropping.
In about 2 sentences, the author manages to alienate pretty much anyone who would want to consider that product and the new features.
It's this massive unawareness that even though something like Docker is the cool new way of doing it, probably 90+% of businesses (especially cap-weighted) remain doing things with legacy systems and are necessarily slow to adapt. Not only are they not using 2.0 ... they're not even using 1.0!
This kind of marketing might work when you mostly only want other start-ups for your clients. But if you want bigger players, you have to think about it from their perspective. Do you want to offend the 15-year veteran VP of Operations who got a promotion 7 years ago when everybody thought signing some enterprise contract was the right thing, and now your presentation basically starts from sentence #1 saying "You did it all wrong, old man!" You're just priming that senior VP, who wields the political power to utterly veto you from their new product search, and motivating him to want to make sure you're not around to bring any kind of critical highlight to any of his previous choices.
This is an important point in business. I never even thought about until I read "How to Win Friends and Influence People" but now I start to see it more often (especially when I do it, which is still too often for my goals).
Now let's take a random situation: You have a business that makes widgets. You have customers, suppliers, parts, etc. Do you store that information in Word as text? Of course not. You either have a spreadsheet or database, right? Text is great for a novel or a poem... but not for data. That would be crazy.
Currently, the web is still a big collection of text documents. How optimal is that? Deeply sub-optimal. The number of people going to the Google homepage is declining because people are now just going directly to the database that represents what they're looking for. Looking to buy a home? You go to Zillow or Trulia and query their database. People want data, not text. 95% of the web wants to be data.
Now imagine if that company mentioned before had significant market share. The authentication is common across all of these databases, they all have the same API (the language), and so instead of appearing as many databases, it appears as one large database of everything. Suddenly a network effect kicks in and if you have something you want to be discovered (which is what the web consists of) it makes sense to join in.
The next Google won't be better text search but instead something completely different -- it will be data. And the web will become essentially a massive database. I don't know who will get there, no one can know, or how it will happen, but it will happen; it's waiting to happen.