well we got blindsided by Yahoo! when they released Livetext while we were still in stealth with a buggy MVP (in fact, TechCrunch broke the story the same day we submitted to the App Store)
pro: we don't have the validate the concept anymore
con: now we're playing catch-up with an Internet giant
anyway, guess there's some solace in having the only alternative on iOS for video texting without sound, and we still think our minimalist design is pretty cool
help us keep morale up by checking it out, thanks!
As someone who relocated from DC to SV two years ago, DC has always had a healthy startup scene that is, as you suspect, hampered severely by money flow. That's not to say it's not possible to fundraise where you are, it's just amazingly much harder to do so.
Your pitch is never "finished" because it's a living reflection of your conviction, your passion and most importantly, a tangible opportunity (for investment, for employment, for customers).
You should pitch whenever you can, to whomever you can, until doing so is effortless.
A pitch is foremost a test of your own faith in your project. If there is any self-doubt, your pitch will betray it, and you will know you aren't ready (or that the idea and your execution aren't going to cut it).
The path I took (founded four startups previously, two exits, currently working on fifth) was to first have a go at consulting.
Working for yourself is not much different from running a startup. You have a product (yourself). You have sales (winning contracts). You have accounting (for your invoices and for your expenses) and have to keep books. You have legal (your contracts). It's a great way to learn how to run a (hopefully) profitable business and build the foundation you'll need to run a startup.
Here's a shorter version: Are you so inspired by a software product or service that you are driving yourself mad thinking about how it was created? Great, do whatever you can to write your own version. Keep at it. Seriously, keep at it. Are you so obsessed with figuring this out that you are unaware that hours are passing by while you work? Awesome. You have discovered a true passion. Now you don't need to read things titled "How to Be a Programmer" because you will drive yourself to become one innately.
For everyone else, go ahead and try to read things titled "How to Be a Programmer" but don't expect it to actually help you, you know, BECOME one.
Wow, hold your horses cow boy. Did you even read the article? It's about being a programmer in the real world; that is how to communicate effectively, know when to tell management that you think a certain decision was a mistake, how to approach project schedule estimation, and so on.
As a young hacker who's not sure yet where he belongs in the world of tech & science & engineering (worked freelance, worked in startups, worked in research as a grad student, worked in larger companies, and I still don't know what I want to spend my life as a hacker doing :-), I found it extremely useful and well written.
Excellent way to become an arrogant coding cowboy. "My passion is so great so there is nothing anyone can teach me. Just by hacking alone in my basement my innate ability to write efficient and correct code have started to bloom."
+1. Your short version pretty much summarize what other 1000 people would say. And that's what I told people who came to my school's open house today: look around you and see what kind of things you wish you could control. You want to be able to get all the files with certain prefix? Figure out that linux/windows command.
The title "A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary". This is not short. It's pretty verbose.
It's hard to be short and comprehensive. This is shorter than a book, longer than a magazine article. (55 pages: OK, maybe a short book.) "Short" is relative. :)
His coverage of debugging, and how it's critical to overcome fear of breaking things, and of asking the right questions of how things might fail in this way, is a great explanation.
Apple should institute an unpublished karma score for reviewers based on number of reviews, how long a user used the app prior to reviewing, etc and use it to weigh both visibility of the review and its contribution to the average score.
The general idea you propose has a lot of merit. One nit though -
>how long a user used the app prior to reviewing
Unfortunately, if the app crashes right after loading it on your phone then you won't have a very long time of use before reviewing it. I'm not sure your 1 star review should be discounted in this situation.
If you, as a startup founder, can't authentically and sincerely project energy, excitement and confidence about your idea, then something is either wrong with your idea or you are in the wrong business.
The problem with this logic is that "energy, excitement and confidence" don't have anything to do with the merits of an idea. An idea can be good without any exhibitions of personality. The tree still falls, after all.
However, if expressions about an idea do relate to the quality of that idea, each taken in isolation, what does that say about the concept of meritocracy? That perhaps meritocracy applies only to people and not ideas, and that "meritocracy" in this context has a much narrower definition than a plain reading of the word would suggest.
I mean confidence can be a part of execution... for example, when you are trying to sell a product. Ingenuity, perseverance, etc, are also attributes of execution and they are not strictly technical.
In other words, if you just have technology (and we're assuming not groundbreaking patentable-technology), you'll likely fail if you have no perseverance and no ability to convince people why it's useful.
All startup founders know they stand a better chance if they project energy, excitement, and confidence, and this is very cheap and easy to do, so they all do it.
As a result, experienced investors become inured, skeptical of it, and ignore it, knowing it's the easiest thing a founder can fake. They look for signals of more substantial stuff, be it the Three T's (Team, Technology, Traction) or something else.
In fact I would argue these days you stand a better chance of distinguishing yourself among investors if you pointedly do not exude energy and excitement at least, but rather sober, quiet confidence, competence, domain expertise, focus, and resolve.
That said, his points about actually being confident, and managing your own psychology, are right on.
