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

A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

acrossapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 468 posts

Re: A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

#111

Post by hef19898 »

matsemann wrote: post #24

Not exactly the same, but I have sometimes wondered how many startups are just burning other startups' money, and would collapse if VCs tightened the belt. For instance, startup X seems profitable but all revenue is from other startups not making money yet. Like a big ponzi scheme of sorts. Most products mentioned in the article are now mainstream, but for lots of them a few years back they were small and only used b…

Like the Berlin startup selling startup branded merchandise to other Berlin based startups?

Might very well be the case.

Re: A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

#113

Post by hef19898 »

GordonS wrote: post #68
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #33

I am the CIO of a mostly remote, cybersecurity startup (50 FTEs). I balance between not single-threading all choices through me and not letting things get too out of hand. That means no one is every really happy. E.g., we use Uberconference for videoconferencing. We thoroughly looked at a bunch of others and chose UC for its functionality, price, and simplicity (every conference gets a simple phone number, no stupid…

It sounds like a few simple rules would help - you don't need complex procedures and forms, it can be as simple as "if you want to buy new software, ask the CIO or CTO, and in most cases they'll say yes/no on the spot". I can't help but think this is a symptom of being awash with VC cash - I can't imagine this happening in a bootstrapped business.

I tend to agree. Bootstrapping, and small budgets, force discipline. Even without procedures. Practically infinite budgets tend to have the opposite effect. If senior management isn't forcing discipline things can get out of hand pretty quick.

Re: A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

#115

Post by Spooky23 »

Tainnor wrote: post #46
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #33

I am the CIO of a mostly remote, cybersecurity startup (50 FTEs). I balance between not single-threading all choices through me and not letting things get too out of hand. That means no one is every really happy. E.g., we use Uberconference for videoconferencing. We thoroughly looked at a bunch of others and chose UC for its functionality, price, and simplicity (every conference gets a simple phone number, no stupid…

Eh, the problem with the "IT department dictates all the choices because the devs are stupid" approach is that it takes ownership away from the devs, therefore leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy. If I can't be trusted to make technology decisions for the system I know about (and the IT department knows nothing about), then why should I care about delivering the best possible product? Sorry, I've seen exactly that…

If IT is too helpless to pick Zoom vs Ubeeconference vs whatever, what’s the point in having them?

Conversely, if you are a developer and you have time to be shopping for video conferencing solutions, what’s the point in having you?

Re: A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

#116

Post by chishaku »

heartbeats wrote: post #105
Shacklz wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Voluntary redistribution through loss making startups is the comfortable alternative to wealth taxes. That's just a little bit of redistribution from the top 1% to the top 10%, at best. Tech startups and their new fancy apps aren't putting food on the table or paying the health care bill for the bottom 90%.

Anything is better than nothing, isn't it? Savings rate goes up with income. On a percentage basis, the 10% are going to be spending more money at restaurants, shops, etc. This is, arguably, preferable to the 1% investing it in the stock market.

trickle down is definitely the solution /s

Re: A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

#117

Post by 76543210 »

Shacklz wrote: post #93
pjc50 wrote: post #73

SoftBank invested something like $24bn in WeWork, which went to the real estate bubble plus free beer for techies. There is an astonishing amount of money out there. In the case of the Saudi investment through SoftBank, it's practically a moral imperative to relieve them of it. Enjoy it while it lasts. Voluntary redistribution through loss making startups is the comfortable alternative to wealth taxes.

> Voluntary redistribution through loss making startups is the comfortable alternative to wealth taxes. That's just a little bit of redistribution from the top 1% to the top 10%, at best. Tech startups and their new fancy apps aren't putting food on the table or paying the health care bill for the bottom 90%.

I'm starting to think we need a 10%er collition.

Our taxes went up under Trump. Healthcare got worse under Obama.

The billionaire class uses the 90 percent to win elections. They have stopped pandering to us.

Re: A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

#118

Post by kludgekraft »

As a B2B startup building an enterprise product, we've had to be wary of using external services as a part of our offering. Our customers prefer predictable/fixed-annual pricing and do not sign up for saas pricing models, especially the ones that cost a lot at scale. Also, this eats into our margins as the external service has no obligation/contract to reduce prices.

Re: A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

#119

Post by afarrell »

fivre wrote: post #74
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #33

I am the CIO of a mostly remote, cybersecurity startup (50 FTEs). I balance between not single-threading all choices through me and not letting things get too out of hand. That means no one is every really happy. E.g., we use Uberconference for videoconferencing. We thoroughly looked at a bunch of others and chose UC for its functionality, price, and simplicity (every conference gets a simple phone number, no stupid…

The individuals in aggregate may be toddlers, but unfortunately the C-suite as individuals are often also toddlers, at least vis a vis their responsibilities. Tasked with providing IT infrastructure that works for the company, they seem to largely shirk their responsibility and choose IT infrastructure that best serves them, the needs of others be damned. CIOs will seemingly gladly choose something that provides a go…

Part of the problem here is that there is a balance to be struck with these sorts of things: Cost, User experience, Mange-ability, and time spent shopping around rather than just going with the industry-default or one with the best sales-team. Responsible decision-makers have to make trade-offs.

When you say

> Reports...are roundly ignored

That lack of weight given to your experience as a signal of real business cost is a real problem.

So what is the solution?

1. Understand the problem they're trying to solve. What are their real motives and pressures?

2. Understand where your needs align with theirs and where they diverge in reality.

3. Tell a compelling story of where your needs are in fact aligned.

3.1) Prepare Evidence

If your case is "This tool is causes literal permanent eye injuries to our staff", then there should be written reports of those injuries. If your case is "This software package has multiple missing-affordances which present operational risks to the business", then you should be able to take screen recordings of that.

3.2) Start with why

When turning evidence into a presentation, remember that people listen better when they know why they are listening. So start with: What is at stake?

3.3) Credible language

If your words say "the UX for hundreds or thousands of others is 'the software literally shoots knives out of the monitor and gouges out your eyes'" but you can't actually back that up with the factual reality, you seem like you're exaggerating. If I think you are exaggerating, then I can't trust your words when I'm trying to understand magnitudes.

If I can't trust your words about magnitudes, then how do I give you a voice in making a well-balanced trade-off?

-------

Literally: (adverb)

1. In in a way of speaking that is completely accurate and unexaggerated.

2. In in a way of speaking that is exaggerated for emotional effect.

Re: A two-person startup already uses twenty-eight other tools

#120

Post by moron4hire »

leeoniya wrote: post #43
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #33

I am the CIO of a mostly remote, cybersecurity startup (50 FTEs). I balance between not single-threading all choices through me and not letting things get too out of hand. That means no one is every really happy. E.g., we use Uberconference for videoconferencing. We thoroughly looked at a bunch of others and chose UC for its functionality, price, and simplicity (every conference gets a simple phone number, no stupid…

> (every conference gets a simple phone number, no stupid 9-digit code plus pin plus participant id) in our case, UC constantly failed hard to properly encode an essentially static excel sheet over screen share - jpeg artifacts the size of basketballs that never went away, even when given infinite time to "catch up". zoom has zero issues with screen share, but randomly drops calls, and yeah the phone + 9 digit id + p…

That's weird about Zoom. We have whomever is scheduling the meeting paste their personal meeting ID into the meeting invite. It's one click for anyone joining, including the host.
Post reply on HN