Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 648 posts

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#151

Post by jdietrich »

OneWordSoln wrote: post #103

Not startup-related, but: Long-life incandescent light bulbs. They were done in by "planned obsolescence"; I haven't watched this video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdh7_PA8GZU ) yet but it has a good ratio. I can't stand the light from LED or fluorescent light bulbs, and GE can pour themselves a warm bath.

The efficiency of an incandescent lightbulb is directly proportional to its lifespan. Long-life incandescent bulbs are a false economy.

The problem with LEDs is simply that people buy based solely on price. A Yuji high-CRI LED lamp is genuinely indistinguishable from an incandescent lamp, but you'll never see one in a hardware store because they're slightly more expensive.

https://store.yujiintl.com/collections/high-cri-led-lights

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#152

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

valleyjo wrote: post #8

Rdio. Music Streaming service. Not sure what happened after they closed up shop but the UI was beautiful and they had great performance.

After Rdio was cancelled, I never bothered to sign up for another streaming service. I, too, miss their beautiful UI.

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#153

Post by bri3d »

EamonnMR wrote: post #131
didymospl wrote: post #22

last.fm Although it didn't die yet, it certainly doesn't live up to its potential.

I know last.fm entirely as a site that you get in search results for song titles and lyrics but forces you to log in. What service does it provide exactly? Was it just a very early streaming site with great seo?

No, it started as a "scrobbling" service where you could send data about each track you listened to from the player and service of your choice. For a brief time it was a decent social network and recommendation tool, and it could have been a lot more with the volume of data collected but has languished.

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#154

Post by jdietrich »

Steinberger guitars. They were brilliant to play, they were incredibly lightweight, they were near-indestructible, they could stay in tune for weeks, but they were just too weird to be anything more than a fad. It didn't help that Ned Steinberger had questionable business skills, they never really got manufacturing costs under control, but the basic design was utterly brilliant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinberger

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#155

Post by ncmncm »

jtbayly wrote: post #106
karmakaze wrote: post #56

JavaFX Silverlight Adobe AIR

This has to be a joke, right? I’m not informed enough to know, but it seems like I’ve only heard negative stuff about these.

Yes. Snark.

Then there was the Moonlight knockoff based on Mono. And Mono itself, of course. Dead ends before the project ever started, but they finished and shipped them.

Let's not neglect .Net.

But we're supposed to be talking about good products, not misbegotten ones.

So: Apple Newton!

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#156

Post by GlennS »

EamonnMR wrote: post #131
didymospl wrote: post #22

last.fm Although it didn't die yet, it certainly doesn't live up to its potential.

I know last.fm entirely as a site that you get in search results for song titles and lyrics but forces you to log in. What service does it provide exactly? Was it just a very early streaming site with great seo?

It was a streaming site which also had plugins for various media players to let you track what you listened to.

Then you could see tables of what you listened to most, see what your friends listened to, and get recommendations.

I think what happend is that last.fm failed to get deals with the recording companies, while Spotify succeeded (somehow?).

Nowadays I use Spotify like everyone else, but I feel like last.fm gave me much better recommendations. Probably because it had many many years or listening history.

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#157

Post by anyfoo »

jccalhoun wrote: post #120

minidisc didn't exactly flop but it should have been a lot bigger than it was. Great hardware. If Sony hadn't insisted on their ATRAC and drmed it to hell it would have been much more competitive.

Reading how MiniDisc flopped is always a bit confusing to Europeans (and, presumably, Japanese), as it was actually relatively popular over there. It‘s true that prerecorded media never gained any traction, but for recording your own media from CDs or radios (or later MP3s) it was reasonably common. People especially liked how compact the portable players were.

Then Sony pretty much messed it up with NetMD.

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#158

Post by throwaway8879 »

jdietrich wrote: post #154

Steinberger guitars. They were brilliant to play, they were incredibly lightweight, they were near-indestructible, they could stay in tune for weeks, but they were just too weird to be anything more than a fad. It didn't help that Ned Steinberger had questionable business skills, they never really got manufacturing costs under control, but the basic design was utterly brilliant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinber…

I own several. I'd trust any gear used by Allan Holdsworth. Not that it will help sound like him! I'm digging the recent explosion of headless guitars, Strandberg et al. I started playing on a Strat-shaped body so anything different throws me off. Even the bridge position on a Les Paul type body spooks me.

I guess one of the reasons headless/compact guitars don't go outside of the niche of progressive/fusion circles is that it just doesn't have the "cool" factor or traditional bodies. Imagine Duane Allman with a Streinberger, or Clapton, Page etc. Just seems out of place I guess.

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#159

Post by byproxy »

jdietrich wrote: post #154

Steinberger guitars. They were brilliant to play, they were incredibly lightweight, they were near-indestructible, they could stay in tune for weeks, but they were just too weird to be anything more than a fad. It didn't help that Ned Steinberger had questionable business skills, they never really got manufacturing costs under control, but the basic design was utterly brilliant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinber…

As a guitarist that has a few traditional guitars.... I really want to add a headless guitar made out if modern materials (i e. not wood) to my lineup soon!
Post reply on HN