Don Norman recently wrote a fine piece entitled “Why is 37Signals So Arrogant?“. As a student of link/click bait, I have to applaud him. Bravo! It’s right up there with Jason Calacanis’ post about firing anyone who isn’t a workaholic (his followup is a bit more measured).

So I’m going to do one better than Don Norman, and tell you exactly why 37Signals is so arrogant.

But, first I’m going to tell you that they’re not. At least not in the way that Norman is saying. 37Signals listens VERY HARD to their users. It’s amazing to note that up until recently (correct me if I’m wrong) Jason Fried read (and sometimes responded to) every single support email. In light of this, to say that 37Signals doesn’t listen to their users is absurd.

Norman and Nielsen have always argued that the best way to understand users is to watch them use your product. I tend to agree- but dealing with support yourself as a product developer is a close second– it’s an amazing way to feel the pain and confusion of your users. Most product developers hire a cheap support staff as soon as they can manage– to get themselves out of the muck. These guys didn’t.

But, come on. Read their blog. Take a look at DHH’s (in)famous “Fuck You” Slide. These guys are clearly arrogant.

Here’s why.

Take a look at the people that most people envy. Hell, start in high school and work your way up. How many times have you said, “why is that girl dating that absolute JERK?” Look at all of the people who are successful in this world and you’ll find a fairly common theme. There is a decided absence of humble and self-deprecating people. There aren’t a lot of people on top who are frequently saying, “I am wrong and you are right”.

So it’s easy to say that as software geeks we are above that. We grew up on the wrong end of “nice guys finish last” and we’re going to be bigger than that. But look at the giants of our world. Steve Jobs. Linus Torvalds. Paul Graham. Joel Spolsky. Bill Gates. Jakob Neilsen. There are certainly degrees of it in this collection of stars, but every single one of them speaks and acts with near-absolute assurance and authority. They embrace controversy and sometimes provoke it. Every single one of ‘em has been called arrogant.

As masters of marketing, the fellas at 37Signals are (either consciously or unconsciously) lumping themselves in with the guys at the top of the food chain. They are the high school equivalent of the insensitive guy in the letterman’s jacket who always gets the girl. They are talking the talk, stirring the pot, saying surprising things, pissing people off, and daring the world to prove them wrong.

You might not like them, but you’re looking at them and listening to them– which is more than you can say for the thousands of other 10-person profitable software companies out there.

I would like to finish by saying that I’m better than you. I’m right. You’re wrong. My [insert language/platform/dev tool] is better than your [insert language/platform/dev tool].

Thanks for listening.

Well, not all of it. That title was blatant click-bait. You’re here and I’ve won. Nyah!

I’ve long been passionate about reading and digesting every tidbit of information about what it takes to build a successful startup. I’m an avid reader of people like Seth Godin, Paul Graham, Guy Kawasaki, the fellas at VentureHacks, Fred Wilson, Josh Kopelman, Andrew Chen, and more. As a participant in the YCombinator program, I have weekly dinners with entrepreneurs who have “hit it big” (Marc Andreessen, Ev Williams, Paul Buchheit, Chris Sacca, & Joe Kraus, to name a few).

All of the things I’ve learned are incredibly useful and all of it (paradoxically) can be incredibly wrong.

Let me explain my thinking here. Human beings love formulas. Human beings who succeed naturally think that they’ve stumbled onto a magical step-by-step guide on how other people can succeed, too. They blog about it, speak about it, and generally spread their wisdom far and wide.

The funny thing is that when you read/hear enough of this stuff, you start hearing brilliant and successful people presenting advice that directly conflicts with the advice from other brilliant and successful people.

Here are a few examples:

• “Release Early and Listen to your users” VS “Ignore your Users and Build for Yourself.”
• “Seek out Press early and often” VS “go guerrilla until you have a brilliant product“
• “Failure to scale kills” VS “you can have tons of downtime and still grow like gangbusters“
• “Take more funding than you need” VS “overfunding kills“
• “Viral always wins” VS Google Search (which is not REMOTELY viral).
• “Design is critical for user engagement and trust” VS um…. MySpace. CraigsList. Google.
• “Starting a business on Microsoft technologies is ridiculous” VS MySpace or PlentyOfFish (2-3 people, classic ASP, a few MS servers = millions of bucks)
• Headcount! VS Keeping your team lean to force scarcity (CraigsList and 37Signals)

The list goes on. Find me a startup truism and I’ll find you a successful startup which is a living and breathing counter-example. All of the advice that you read and hear is incredibly valuable– but it’s very situational. Add it to your “startup utility belt” and whip it out when you hit a bump in the road that looks familiar. “Andreessen ran into this and solved the problem thusly. That’s what I’ll try!” But don’t think that you can arm yourself with a list of platitudes and expect to build a startup.

The Two Truisms that Aren’t Lies

Now that I’ve finished saying that there’s no formula, I’m going to give you the two pieces of advice that (near as I can tell) EVERY successful founder has followed. Zero exceptions.

1. Build something people want. This will make or break you. Period. The success of your idea is a function of how much people want it and how many people want it. Make your product better on this front every single week. Every single DAY, if you can. Everything else is a distraction. If you can’t say, “What I’m doing RIGHT NOW will make [people want what we have more] or [more people want what we have]” you should seriously question how you’re spending your time. (Which begs the question, what the hell am I doing writing this blog post?!). FWIW, I think you should exhaust the former (increase the how much your users love you) before the latter (increase how many users love you)
2. Don’t stop. Persist. Keep going. The idea of an overnight success is largely ridiculous, even if the press loves to tell you otherwise. (just ask Matt Mullenweg of WordPress). You’ll think you are on the verge of death early and often, but you aren’t– and you can make it through if you start with an idea that people want and keep working on #1. Read Paul’s Essay, “How Not to Die“– it’ll help!

I can’t think of a single startup that has died from an over-emphasis on these two points. Can you?

Someone posted an interesting “Ask YC”, asking:

“How to start becoming an entrepreneur while still being an employee?”

Having done this twice (started a company that eventually turned into a full-time startup), I settled in to reply. Before long, it was clear that my response was long enough to justify a blog post.

I’ve done two part-time-to-full-time startups (one resulted in a startup the sold, the second is RescueTime– currently a YC-funded company– cross your fingers).

At the end of the day, I think Paul Graham is right when he says:

“The number one thing not to do is other things. If you find yourself saying a sentence that ends with “but we’re going to keep working on the startup,” you are in big trouble. Bob’s going to grad school, but we’re going to keep working on the startup. We’re moving back to Minnesota, but we’re going to keep working on the startup. We’re taking on some consulting projects, but we’re going to keep working on the startup. You may as well just translate these to “we’re giving up on the startup, but we’re not willing to admit that to ourselves,” because that’s what it means most of the time. A startup is so hard that working on it can’t be preceded by “but.”"

In the beginning, however, it’s not always practical to dive in full-time. And sometimes when your idea is off-the-wall and also easy to build a prototype for, it’s smart to whip something out just to see if what you’re building is as cool as you think it might be before you take the plunge.

So if you’re too poor or too unsure to do the right thing for your business and dive in full-time, here are a few things that seemed to work for us when we did it part-time:

1. You need a co-founder and some cheerleaders… If you can’t find 2-3 friends who are really excited to be beta testers for what you’re building, ponder changing your direction. The arguments for a co-founder are many and varied. For a part-time effort, they are essential to keep you on-track and working. At some point, you’ll hit a motivation wall… If you have a partner who is depending on you, you find a way past that. If you don’t, you’ll often lose interest and find something else to entertain you.
2. Pick a day or two per week where you ALWAYS work, ideally in the same room as your co-founder(s). ALWAYS, no exceptions. We did 1 weekday evening and 1 weekend day. That doesn’t mean we weren’t working other days, but having a fixed schedule helps you through the phases of the project that might not be so fun.
3. Have a boat-burning target. What will it take for everyone to dive in full-time? 5,000 active users? 10,000 uniques a week? Funding? That should be a shared understanding. You don’t want to have one founder ready to go full-time when another has reservations. This is easy to gloss over, but you should really nail it down. I’ve lost 2 co-founders to this issue (they weren’t ready to dive in full time and I was). It wasn’t fair to them and it wasn’t fair to me.
4. Pick an idea that is tractable. Every business is a theory. If your theory is, “we can build a better web-based chat client”, that’s something you could test quickly. If you’re theory is “we can build a car that runs on lemonade”, that’s just not going to work as a part-time effort. The scarcity of available time should force you to distill the idea to the absolute essence that is necessary to test the theory. No extraneous features!
5. Understand that your v1 ia probably going to suck. Read David of Weebly’s post on persistence. It’s a long road. My first startup was a ridiculous fluke (2 months and then sold). 99% of the overnight successes you read about were slogging in the muck for 5 years before the night in question. Be prepared for a long journey and be surprised if your startup is an immediate hit. So with your v1, look for the tiny little flicker than you might be on to something to motivate you to make it better. Every week, make it better than last week and see if that flicker of light can be fanned into a tiny flame.
6. If you’re going to screw off at work (everyone does), spend it getting smarter about the stuff you don’t know. If you’re a coder, read a few design/usability blogs. Read up on what motivates angel investors. Research competitors and write down what they do well. Get brilliant at SEO (it’s not hard). Write a LOT more (blogging helps). Think about virality and research the heck out of it. This is all more valuable (and hopefully just as fun) as looking at LOLcats on Reddit. All that being said, be aware of the fuzzy line between using your cool-down time at work for your startup and stealing time/resources from your employer. If you’re paid to do a job, you need to do it.
7. [edit: Thanks to Ivan in the comments] Be sure you own your startup. I’ve had the fortune to work in places and companies where there was very clear ownership of “after hours” work. If ownership of your personal IP is not clear, do NOT rely on the good will of your employer. Greed can do funny things to people, even if they were initially big supporters of your startup.

At the end of the day, you want to prove whatever you need to prove as quickly as possible, so you can dive in full-time. Near as I can tell, there are plenty of startups that have started as “hobbies”, but you need to take it out of that phase as soon as you can. There is nothing that drives a team forward like the fear of public failure, debt, and starvation. Leap off the cliff and start building the airplane on the way down and you might be surprised with what you can pull off.

Big release for RescueTime today. I have no time to write about it (and probably oughta write on the RescueTime blog if I did have time… which I promise I’ll do).

If you’re a RescueTime user, check it out and let us know your thoughts!

Everyone with a fine liberal arts education should be familiar with Zeno’s Dichotomy Paradox (props to Steve Leroux for helping me remember his damn name).

“Suppose Homer wants to catch a stationary bus. Before he can get there, he must get halfway there. Before he can get halfway there, he must get a quarter of the way there. Before traveling a quarter, he must travel one-eighth; before an eighth, one-sixteenth; and so on.”

I can think of no better description of software development releases (or product development in general). At some point you have to say “fuck it”, fall forward, and confound Zeno. Throw caution to the wind and ship too early and you ship crap– and your users know it. Aim for perfection and days stretch to weeks as each day brings you asymptotically closer to greatness (which sucks the life out of any team, IMO). I know teams who literally have worked for a year or more without shipping anything to anyone. I don’t know how they can do it.

But, any way you slice it, those last few days before a release feel like you’re wading through rancid molasses.

There has been a lot of chatter lately about alternatives to Silicon Valley. There is no denying that Silicon Valley produces more startup success than any other town. But is it cause or effect? Does SV add some secret sauce to the startup recipe or is it simply a place where a lot of geeks tend to congregate?

For starters, it’s a good idea to read Glenn Kelman’s outstanding post on Seattle as a startup hub, inspired by the New York Times piece on the same topic. TechCrunch fairly quickly blew the post out of the water, causing Glenn to post a solid (and humble) response. And, causing Alan to point out that Arrington is “being a wanker”. Fun stuff! I I’m a big Arrington fan, but I’ll second the sentiment… It’s easy to crap on an upstart. Windows people have been doing it to Mac people for years. “You’re so far behind, why are you even trying? It’s almost pathetic,” they say. Strange that you don’t hear that too much anymore from the Windows camp. Never count out an upstart!

As a founder who is currently hip deep in the YCombinator experience in Silicon Valley, my initial inclination was to return to Seattle in March. I’m currently rethinking that sentiment (but haven’t made any sweeping decisions). The purpose of this post is to publicly run through some thoughts on this and get some feedback.

As mentioned by just about entire world, Silicon Valley births more startups than anyone. By a huge margin. It’s ridiculous how far it is ahead of upstarts like Boston, Seattle, Austin, etc. It’s obvious to me that there are many more startup PEOPLE in SV (which is a big reason for the number), but are there factors there that make startups more successful? I’m going to run through the thing I think are critical for a startup and how I think SV adds to them. Call me out if I’m wrong or if I’m missing anything:

• First and foremost, a startup needs to build something people want. I don’t think SV really helps here. In fact, the “echo chamber” effect might cause founders to thing that people around the world actually think and behave like the geeks in SV. If you buy the argument that SV people are smarter/better than other folks, then maybe SV would get an edge here.
• A startup needs a great team. People who destroy problems. People who prioritize the right problems. SV certainly has the edge here in supply, but it’s difficult to determine how the demand effects that availability of these people. I will say that, while I have been pretty damn impressed with the people in SV, I don’t think they are any better than the best people in Seattle (but there sure are a lot of ‘em). And they tend to be more motivated, more monomaniacal, and more mercenary. Again, it’s hard to gauge supply and demand here– there are plenty of startup nuts in Seattle. I’m tempted to give the edge here to Silicon Valley because that’s what people smarter than me have concluded in the past, but that seems like a lousy reason to do it. It comes down to this– if I spend 6 months trying to build a small kickass engineering team, would I get a better team in SV? Or is the competition too fierce?
• Startups need to work their asses off. This seems to be one of Arrington’s main points: That Seattle-folk frolic on hiking trails and in kayaks instead of working on their startup. I think that’s pretty ridiculous. Passion and dedication aren’t geographically bound. There are plenty of SV people who bounce from party to party and conference to conference when they should be coding or slinging pixels. This is a personal trait, though you could argue that SV attracts more monomaniacal folks. Again, however, there’s no denying SV has the edge in supply– but does the demand outstrip it? Does more = more who are available?
• Startups need money and time. And, oftentimes, money can buy you time. Here, Silicon Valley bitch-slaps any of the upstarts. Anecdotally, it seems that funding in SV happens quicker (allowing founders to get back to building products). It also seems more available for early-stage companies. For companies who can’t bootstrap their way to a 12-18 month runway, this is huge consideration. This is also a big deal for companies without an obvious revenue model (Twitter?).
• Startups need blog and press coverage. SV wins here, too– by a healthy margin. I’m tempted to break out my “marketing is a tax you pay for being unremarkable” quote (I wish I could recall who originally said this). I firmly believe that you’ll get coverage if you’ve made something exceptional that people really want. There’s no arguing, however, that that you’ll probably get more if you go to the right parties and conferences, and manage to chat with bloggers like Scoble or Arrington.
• Distribution and deals. Technologists can often be snarky about the idea of bizdev, but it can be damn powerful. At the end of the day, many of the people you want to be doing deals with are probably in the Valley, and deals happen better if you can meet face to face ( and meet often, if necessary). There’s something inherently more comfortable about doing a deal with a company down the street. SV wins here, hands down.
• Lawyers and accountants. SV has more specialized services folks, but I’ve literally never heard of a startup who died from lack of a great startup lawyer. I think there is a healthy supply of these in any of the upstart hubs. Am I being naive here?
• People who buy startups. Acquisitions are like any other deal. They oftentimes happen because of face-to-face meetings and are probably likelier to happen if you are right down the street from your potential suitor. Seattle has Microsoft and Amazon. SV has just about everyone else who buys startups, notably Google and the ailing Yahoo(soft). Your mileage will vary, depending on your startup. A financial software startup might have a better chance of getting bought in NYC.

It’s probably safe to say that each of the above points carry different weights for different startups. A company like mine might not care much about great startup lawyers, but a company like Avvo might. A company like Twitter clearly cares an awful lot about funding– it’s a big play with a ton of upfront expenses and no immediate way to make a pile of money. But for a company like mine (which, ultimately, is probably going to live or die based on the value we can provide to businesses), will living in Silicon Valley give us enough of an edge to justify the expense and distraction of moving?

RescueTime will never be a purveyor of widgets (as a primary business), but there’s no denying that widgets are a damn good way to spread the word about your product, assuming that anyone actually wants to install them.

A widget that displays exactly how you spend your computer time may be creepy to some. As an old skool fella who is a bit more privacy-focused, I never really thought that a widget belonged anywhere on our near-term product roadmap. However, when we did our “What features do you want?” survey, thousands of people filled it out… 26% of ‘em expressed interest in a widget.

Sooooo, we built widgets. You can see mine to the right hand side of this blog– it’s a real time report of exactly what categories of my computer time I’m spending the most time on.

As we started thinking about it, RescueTime widgets could be used for all sorts of fun stuff:

• Lifestreaming. Just a fun little way to tell the world how you spend your time.
• Life hacking. We all know that discipline is hard. As Paul Graham says, there is nothing more motivating than the fear of public failure and ridicule. If your productivity data is available for all to see, do you think you’ll be a touch more productive?
• Workstreaming. Want to telecommute? Whip up a page for your boss with a few of your RescueTime graphs up there so he can feel “in touch”. For extra credit, you could throw a few static graphs ABOVE your real-time graphs, giving your boss graphs showing your pre-telecommute productivity.
• Create your own Dashboard! RescueTime has a handy Dashboard, but maybe you care about other graphs that require a few clicks. You could whip up your own “dashboard” (on a private page or intranet, maybe) that shows exactly what you want to see. Right now we really only offer two graph types (top apps/sites and top tags– or labels), but very soon any graph will be embeddable.
• Speaking of Intranets… You could drop a few graphs there to show what you’re up to. This will really start to sing when we introduce our groups functionality (allowing aggregation of multiple people into one graph).

Widgets are officially a beta product– we’ve got a few kinks to work out. For example, in Firefox there is a Flash bug that results in the status bar continuing to report “transferring data from RescueTime.com…” even though it’s not (you can switch to a different tab and back to make the message go away). Anyone know how to fix this?

I love the idea of contextual advertising, and I think Adsense has been a boon to entrepreneurship across the world. But it’s clearly broken. Today we received some nice feedback about RescueTime:

This is the 3rd such email we’ve received, and given that the concept of PPC advertising is increasingly well understood, is not an uncommon sentiment. Internet software has to be free, right? If so, how can a thankful user reward a company?

I wonder how advertisers feel about this? It’s no wonder that Adsense earnings are sharply dropping.

I just posted what I thought was a pretty darn interesting post about Google’s dominance in my life. By my count (and, with RescueTime, my count is pretty damn accurate), 13% of the time I spend in front of my computer is taken up by Google products.

Note that this is COMPUTER time– not just my online time.

Check out the post!

This Tuesday, I’m going to get a chance to meet Kevin Hale, who is the designer behind Wufoo and proprietor of ParticleTree. Kevin wrote a blog post last month that I think is one of the better summations of what it means to be a web designer. While I don’t want to dwell on the negative, Kevin has a pretty good description of why I hate to refer to myself as a designer (whether it’s “web designer”, “ui designer”, “interaction designer”, or whatever).

“For most designers, the relationships they care about most is the one they have with the design. They seem to only love the design and more often than not, they tend to love the design too much. These designers focus on their legacy at the expense of the audience. The user can suck it. You can hear it in the way they talk about the design and how they talk about their users. They’re arrogant and defensive.”

“…When I started working on Wufoo, I was definitely a bad designer. I thought I was hot shit and knew all the answers. I saw the user as a wild beast that needed to be tamed. He got in MY way. Use the tool the way I designed it, fool—not the way you think it should work. Thinking back, I remember being angry all of the time.“

Another great bit:

“On a web application, the design breathes and exhales through customer support. I’m so glad we have Chris on our team. He’s our customer evangelist. Through him, I’ve come to believe that there’s nothing more important than to monitor and man those incoming emails and respond as quickly as possible to every single inquiry, request and comment. It’s the pulse of not only the application, but the business as well. It’s in support requests that Wufoo lets us know when something isn’t working. It’s there that she lets me know when I’ve done something right.”

Give it a read.