Grove inspired me to make an open source alternative: Subway https://github.com/thedjpetersen/subway . And while it is far from perfect it is a start towards opening up IRC to teams.
Grove.io shutting down
31–40 of 205 posts
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its a self-fulfilling prophesy. You can't get big without customers, but customers won't use you because you're small. How do we overcome this? (Edit: I was asking a rhetorical question to counter the parent. But great discussion below.)
It takes time. Some kind of competitive advantage over everything else in the marketplace will help to. People need a reason to bet on your company which overcomes the risk in instability. As time passes and your service stays solid more people will come on board. Something like github is a good example. I doubt many big companies would have considered relying on them early on, but their track record has changed that…
I really meant my point to be a counter to its parent.
But since we're on the topic, presenting social proof is also pretty useful. Show customers that people know, show the press that featured you, show them who you are, who your advisors/investors are, show them whose tweeted about you.
(Maybe writing this will be a catalyst to take my own advice for CircleCi)
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#33This is disappointing. Grove.io was really awesome. IRC channels seem easy, but are (relatively) hard to get going: - Finding a server - Registering it properly - Explaining it to non-tech people The last one is way harder than you'd think. With Grove, you just send them a URL and it's easy. It's a shame they're shutting down. I stopped using because it was too expensive for a channel with a few friends (a channel wi…
I set Grove up for my distributed team but it didn't stick. I still think team-level chat is a problem worth solving, but nothing I've tried has gotten any real traction.
We use standard chat messaging, Skype, Google Hangouts, teleconferencing and a team mailing list. So... clunky, I guess, but it gets the job done.
Chat messaging is for quick questions or requests to Skype or Hangout, Skype for 1 to 1 video or extended audio chats, Hangouts for small group video chats (quality is kind of crummy though), teleconference is for larger meetings and the team mailing list is for "hey everybody, check this cool thing out" type stuff.
IRC would be too much for our designers and some project managers.
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its a self-fulfilling prophesy. You can't get big without customers, but customers won't use you because you're small. How do we overcome this? (Edit: I was asking a rhetorical question to counter the parent. But great discussion below.)
It takes time. Some kind of competitive advantage over everything else in the marketplace will help to. People need a reason to bet on your company which overcomes the risk in instability. As time passes and your service stays solid more people will come on board. Something like github is a good example. I doubt many big companies would have considered relying on them early on, but their track record has changed that…
Yeah but, Github is a different sort of product. You don't lose much if it shuts down (assuming you have your code). You can push your code someplace else.
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#35This is why I refuse to use external services hosted by small/tiny companies that haven't open-sourced their tech. Even in this moment, they still don't seem to be bothering to open source any of it. There's a lesson to be learnt here in terms of gaining buyer trust when you're small. I continue to use our own setup for IRC.
Maybe you touched on the solution. If you're a small startup, putting forward a statement that all the code will be open sourced if you shut down should increase the level of comfort your customers have in the product. What are the downsides I'm not thinking of? Companies that reuse code across multiple products, perhaps. Product A dies, but uses component Foo in Product B that still exists, and represents some kind…
I thought about this earlier - putting a statement on circleci.com saying that if we shut up shop then we'll open source everything. However, I think its dangerous to plant that seed in a users' mind - I think it suggests that there's a danger of that happening (which there isn't, CI fans).
I actually think the solution is to ignore customers with this view. We'll get their business when we "cross the chasm".
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#36This is why I refuse to use external services hosted by small/tiny companies that haven't open-sourced their tech. Even in this moment, they still don't seem to be bothering to open source any of it. There's a lesson to be learnt here in terms of gaining buyer trust when you're small. I continue to use our own setup for IRC.
Maybe you touched on the solution. If you're a small startup, putting forward a statement that all the code will be open sourced if you shut down should increase the level of comfort your customers have in the product. What are the downsides I'm not thinking of? Companies that reuse code across multiple products, perhaps. Product A dies, but uses component Foo in Product B that still exists, and represents some kind…
The most obvious downside is that it creates perverse incentives -- potential customers benefit if you fail. It also telegraphs a lack of...I don't know what the word is. Tenacity? It's kind of like putting a bounty on your own head so that at least somebody can benefit if you die. You really want people to be invested in your survival.
It also limits what you can do with your program. If your program uses code you don't have a license to release, you can't open-source it.
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#37Are there any plans to opensource it? The API hooks were awesome.
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#38It's getting a little difficult to trust stuff by Leah Culver. Everything (that I know of) that she has done so far has either shut down or been acquired and shut down. That said, no hard feelings. It's hard out there. I've never tried to run a company, so I can't judge.
And yet you just did. As a community we praise people for trying, then when it fails we pillory them? A dick move, sir.
If it came off that way, I apologize. I was just expressing the thought that popped into my mind when seeing this. I'm not at all trying to judge her. I think she does excellent work and has just had a few bad apples. I hope her next project is successful.
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
It takes time. Some kind of competitive advantage over everything else in the marketplace will help to. People need a reason to bet on your company which overcomes the risk in instability. As time passes and your service stays solid more people will come on board. Something like github is a good example. I doubt many big companies would have considered relying on them early on, but their track record has changed that…
I really meant my point to be a counter to its parent. But since we're on the topic, presenting social proof is also pretty useful. Show customers that people know, show the press that featured you, show them who you are, who your advisors/investors are, show them whose tweeted about you. (Maybe writing this will be a catalyst to take my own advice for CircleCi)
But that's hacking trust. It's opposite to just being honest and having a publicized contingency plan, or open-source code.
edit (since I can't reply): logic being that social proof is good for business, but has no substance. It doesn't make it any better for users when it comes to shutting down.
Re: Grove.io shutting down
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
I set Grove up for my distributed team but it didn't stick. I still think team-level chat is a problem worth solving, but nothing I've tried has gotten any real traction.
We use standard chat messaging, Skype, Google Hangouts, teleconferencing and a team mailing list. So... clunky, I guess, but it gets the job done. Chat messaging is for quick questions or requests to Skype or Hangout, Skype for 1 to 1 video or extended audio chats, Hangouts for small group video chats (quality is kind of crummy though), teleconference is for larger meetings and the team mailing list is for "hey every…
That's why Grove had a (very nice) web interface.