Creating Passionate Blanks
Yesterday when I wrote about creating 37signals apps for free, I knew I should’ve went with some generic company instead, but I thought a specific example would help everyone reading. However, if you mention 37signals and you don’t praise them to the high heavens there is a good chance a large number of people will misinterpret what you are trying to say and put their own spin on it and attack you back, even though you weren’t attacking them in the first place.
I use Basecamp every once in a while, but I haven’t dived into their other offerings because for now I don’t have a need. I love that the little company made it big. Great inspiration can be found in their story and I think I have said all of this fluff before anyways. In any case I thought I would highlight some of the great comments left yesterday to show how far and wide people can take a discussion. Remember it’s best to read most of these in the comments since some of the logic might be taken out of context.
No, I don’t think 37s would be even remotely worried about a free competitor to any of their products — it just doesn’t make sense.
Why wouldn’t any company worry about a free competitor?
Also, companies turn deaf to using something like Basecamp, no matter how good it is, due to privacy concerns and the fact that their data is hosted on a service based site and not on their own i.e., Corporation paranoia.
Which was one of my points.
Yeah, right. Why just can Sony, Createive and others just get togather and produce an iPod killer over a weekend – that thing is so simple.
I still don’t get, why are you obsessed with 37S…
Why be copycats when you can go and create something different and still great. Or can you?
Because the iPod is iTunes, Apple and status icon.
Wow, lots of ignorance on display here today. No, you can’t whip up Basecamp in a weekend. Go ahead, try. You’re in for a much needed reality check.
Ummm, okay…
Basecamp is great because the team that built it is truly talented. Truly talented people will rarely settle for just copying someone else’s work and releasing it as their own, which is why most copies suck compared to their originals. But, if you can find a talented team that is willing to settle for copying someone else’s work instead of coming up with something of their own… well, then that team is probably not as talented as you think.
An obvious point.
Then when you get to comment #33 you finally find someone who understands where I coming from…sort of..
When I read the post by Scrivs, I have to say I agreed. I like 37s and their products, and I respect what they are trying to do. I can understand why 37s have such an amazing following. However, I understand that 37s have put themselves in a pretty vulnerable position. What they have created is a suite of products which, to be fair, are pretty simple and straightforward. Replicating them now could be done pretty quickly and easily. Not that anyone would want to simply replicate what they have done, but it is possible. And I think what Scrivs is saying is that, in order to hold their position, 37s are going to have to work.
I was waiting for something like this…
Does your desire to put them out of business have anything to do with the fact that 9rules has been a complete and utter failure?
I can’t remember me ever saying or even thinking I want to put 37signals out of business because you know the best way to put them out of business is to start a content network that has nothing to do with what they are doing…
You couldn’t just copy a product, slap another name on it, put them out of business, and expect them to not sue you. Also, , its not just the products, guys. These guys have a huge influence on every piece of development going right now.
Wasn’t sure how to respond to that one.
Overall though if you could filter through the noise, it was a great discussion and I think both sides brought a great number of valuable points which hopefully I can summarize tomorrow. For now I just wanted to show you that if you don’t have a thick skin, don’t say anything about a company as great as 37signals. And yes I do think they are great.
That whole thing was crazy. People take things a little to literal. They need to get a grip!
By Dennis Bullock on April 6, 2006 9:28 pm
Most of the haters probably were picked on in high school and now are taking it out on the world via the internet. A lot of mud can be throw from the safety of your home but come face to face with these kids and I guarantee they won’t be saying “9rules was a complete and utter failure.” Which, by the way, isn’t true at all.
They are like little high school girls with all this jealousy and envy.
By Chris Griffin on April 6, 2006 9:56 pm
“No, I don’t think 37s would be even remotely worried about a free competitor to any of their products — it just doesn’t make sense.”
That quote was taken out of context. My point was that I can’t see how a free service doing exactly what Basecamp/Backpack does could survive, which is why I don’t think 37s would need to worry — it’s simply not facially feasible in my opinion.
There’s more to consider than just code to consider — servers, support, bandwidth, maintenance, management, systems administration and much more.
Show me a “free” model that is financially viable for tens of thousands of users, and is reliable enough for people to rely on as an integral part of their business day, and I’ll happily change my tune.
No, “advertising” is not a good answer, neither is “donations” or any of the other business models most free or open source products attempt to rely on. I don’t believe that would be enough.
This is nothing to do with 37signals, although you were right, you had to give an example. But I’d make the same argument about any online service in the same ballpark from any vendor.
I’ll be the first to say “wow, they did it” if anything like this becomes a financially sustainable reality, and will probably even use it, but please don’t take my comments out of context.
By Justin French on April 6, 2006 10:17 pm
Thanks for the followup Justin and that’s why I made sure to say in the entry that some of the comments might be out of context when not looking at the big picture.
By Scrivs on April 6, 2006 10:20 pm
Haha, this is kind of funny. It’s like a morning-after post.
By Glen C. on April 6, 2006 10:26 pm
It’s funny when you look at all the different thoughts people had and the ways they interpeted your post.
That last comment you had there made me laugh… :)
By Nick Drago on April 6, 2006 11:04 pm
I think maybe this was all a big misunderstanding… I think most people know you weren’t tallking about 37Signals, simply using them as an example, but the example brought up many tangents. Like, fo rme, the best way to copy an existing app over a weekend/week/month – which is to not copy it at all. So I just used your example as an example of trying to copy applications instead of improve them – maybe that will add to the confusion? :)
Justin: I’m confused as to why you think 37Signals products are so different from all the open source ones avaliable that they would be unviable? – they offer the source code for free, then a hosted (maybe ‘improved’) option as they do now… just like SugarCRM and the like
By Natalie Ferguson on April 6, 2006 11:20 pm
Yeah… some of these commenters need to Get Real. ;)
By Jack on April 6, 2006 11:31 pm
It hurts me because I want to love Jason and Scrivs equally.
By Britt on April 7, 2006 12:21 am
Man, a lot of people just hearing what they wanted to in that post. Crazy.
“Show me a “free” model that is financially viable for tens of thousands of users, and is reliable enough for people to rely on as an integral part of their business day, and I’ll happily change my tune.”
G-mail for starters. I’d be worried if I were them, there’s no doubt about it.
Making the decisions that 37signals had to make along the way to building basecamp, that’s where a lot of the elbow grease was spent, I would imagine. Building what they have now and improving upon it from a users perspective – which many of us could do – is feasible, and likely in a shorter timeframe then they made it.
The key tho’ is the title of this post – the signals have passionate users. If Google came along and built G-Camp, I wouldn’t leave BC for it unless G-Camp really offered me something special – all things being equal, the free thing may be the decider for *some people*.
So I think they are – if not worried – aware of the issue, and because of that they do their best to create passionate users. I bet Rundle is a passionate user, they took an idea of his and incorporated it into Basecamp. Perfect. Example.
By Mike Papageorge on April 7, 2006 2:00 am
it’s not just 37s that is vulnerable, any web app can be duplicated. it’s just that 37s is in the spotlight right now.
also, i don’t think they should be worried. they have the hosted solution, the “download and install on own server” would be another whole market (which i’m a little surprised they haven’t done yet). plus there will be new apps to develop.
By Jon H. on April 7, 2006 2:48 am
“Show me a “free” model that is financially viable for tens of thousands of users, and is reliable enough for people to rely on as an integral part of their business day, and I’ll happily change my tune.”
have you ever heard the term “open-source”?
By Jon H. on April 7, 2006 2:52 am
Scriv’s, I see why you started the OreoCEO – NO COMMENTS. It gets lank heated in here…
By JBagley on April 7, 2006 3:11 am
Haha, I understood… sort of… woo! I feel so honoured.
Jon, when I said that they were vulnerable, I meant even in comparison to most other web apps. Of course they are all vulnerable – but 37s’ products more so than others. Their products are so small and lightweight that it would be much easier to undercut 37s than, say, Google. I think that was the point of the original post – the more straightforward the model, the easier it is to replicate.
In reality, Basecamp wouldn’t be Basecamp if it wasn’t ever so easy to use and lacking in bloating features. But this simplicity is also it’s vulnerability. It’s a catch 22 situation.
By Daneeeboy on April 7, 2006 3:13 am
Scrivs: You’re making it sound like the pushback you got was because you mentioned 37signals specifically. It wasn’t.
First of all, copying a meticulously designed high-quality web app regardless of which, is not child’s play and it doesn’t take a small amount of time.
Secondly, a truly talented team won’t settle for just copying every idea and concept from another app, they’ll change something and make different decisions. Every change, even the subtle ones that are barely consciously made, is a potential stray from the golden path that makes the original app great.
Thirdly, only the design can be copied, the server-side code takes talent and time to produce too.
No, I don’t think you will have success in copying another product like that, because your copycat team is very unlikely to be talented at all, at anything they do.
By Tomas Jogin on April 7, 2006 3:57 am
Tomas: You’re still misunderstanding the point of the post. Scrivs is using examples. He already knows that the code can’t be done in a weekend. He knows that the design is easier to copy than the code. All of that is self-explanatory.
What he’s really asking is what is to stop anyone from being an imitator? There is such a low barrier for entry that, besides mindshare, there isn’t anything to truly stop potential imitator’s.
As far as the whole:
That’s not even a question in this situation. Of course they would put their own spin on it but the base would be the same.
Look at how many developers there are out that doing open source projects. I hope you aren’t trying to say they are all untalented hacks.
By Mike Stickel on April 7, 2006 1:12 pm
I was surprised the last discussion didn’t really touch upon one point.
That you could reproduce their product, but could never hope to reproduce their brand equity, following & marketing machine. Those guys are better than most at making GOOD software, but they’re also better than most at GREAT marketing. Which puts them ahead of 99.99% of the teams you could assemble.
By Andy H on April 7, 2006 3:08 pm
Following the conversation is never ceases to amaze me how many people get off tanget because of their loyalty to what is being talked about.
37s isn’t the only company lucky enough not to have an imitator and it puzzles me that some companies don’t have imitators with different business models. An example is FeedBurner. A-Listers called (ok begged) for someone to step up and create an alternative that could be hosted in-house. People offered to pay for the software when it was done and pay to help get it developed. The silence was deafening and it was obvious people were thinking about “right now” instead of tomorrow.
For these companies that don’t have an open source (heck, some have no competition) alternative, what happens if these companies decide to go out of business? How many blogs would lose all their readers if FeedBurner shut down? How many companies would be scrambling if 37s shut down? What if any of these companies were bought out by people that wanted to take the company in a different direction? What if the service level drops? I could go on an on.
With blogging software any of them could shut down and the blogger might be inconvenienced but it would be relatively simple to continue blogging. Companies, especially governmental agencies, are looking to use open source alternatives. In just about every other space people feel more comfortable with alternatives, especially free ones. Why not with web applications? Why couldn’t an open source alternative be great and have great marketing?
Just because it’s open source doesn’t mean it can’t be monetized, does it?
By Tyme on April 7, 2006 3:15 pm
Like Tyme said, open source doesn’t have to mean bad/no marketing at all. Much of the buzz around 37s is because of Rails. Rails is open source and it’s got extemely good marketing. DHH was named Hacker fo the year because of Rails, not because of Basecamp or Backapck or ta-dalists or whatnot.
The 37s guys are good at marketing, and that’s a key part of their success. Apart from making great applications, you’ll have to make great impressions on people too.
I think many commenters are taking the posts to literally. No great programmer/designer would be happy with a verbatim copy of another person/group’s work. They would most certainly put their own flavor on it. 37s was only an example.
By SImen on April 9, 2006 7:11 pm
“what would happen if all the designers and developers in the Network got together for a weekend and copied the 37signals suite of products and then we just released everything for free.”
This to me sounds pretty literal.
Ethics aside, it’s not as easy a task as is claimed. If it were it’d be done by now.
By Adam Thody on April 11, 2006 11:15 am
Copying someone’s design is plagiarism just like copying someone’s words is plagiarism. They are both illegal.
By Jason Fried on April 16, 2006 11:35 am