61–70 of 152 posts
Sorry, you don't get to call your product 'extraordinary' among a crowd of developers. Users may apply that label, and it's your job to try to convince them to do it.
". I realized that Creo is an extraordinary technological challenge and we achieved unbelievable results so far. Who could have developed a new multiplatform programming language with a blazing fast virtual machine? Who could have rewritten from scratch a mobile operating system fully UIKit compatible? Who could have a product like ours? Nobody, probably nobody in the world… and if YC’s choice was driven by the product than we would had no rivals."
Ok, you're amazing.
"I believe that our biggest mistake was to think that being able to develop such an extraordinary product could somehow give us an advantage against the thousand of other ideas presented at Y Combinator. We were wrong."
No, your biggest mistake was to think that you are somehow entitled to an investment and that YC was the lucky one. The opening sentence is indicative of that, according to you it started with a letter from YC to you, but in actual fact you applied first. So you're the seeker, you are the one initiating the relationship and you have to prove yourself worthy of the relationship.
"I really think that the complexity of the Creo project penalized us at YC."
Making something complex simple is a communications issue. If you can't step away from the complexity of the engine underneath your offering then you are not an effective person/entity to communicate with capital providers.
"the only thing that matters for them is the business model … I repeat here again: product has zero value."
You state this as though it is a fact, but it is just your opinion. In order I think that for YC team comes first, product/market fit second and business model last.
Then, the actual interview:
" In few words it’s an app that is able to create other apps. We have developed a new programming language with a multiplatform virtual machine and we have rewritten from scratch a mobile operating system (100% UIKit source compatible), all exposed through a desktop application that makes incredibly fast and easy the creation of mobile applications. Development time is reduced from weeks and months to few hours or days."
This is an old story in IT circles, it comes back every time there is a new medium, sooner or later someone will do 'cross-platform', that's not unique in and of itself.
"OK, but there are other similar technologies . For example …"
Did you let them finish their sentence?
" Creo: Xcode? (Have you read our apply?)"
If they had not you would not have been invited.
" … those are solutions that can be used only by professional developers, our software is for everyone, even for those who are not a developer."
That's another thing that's been said since COBOL about every new language/platform.
" YC: OK got it… so why should not I install Eclipse?"
" Creo: (Eclipse Holy God, you really just said Eclipse??)"
Yes, he did, but so what? If you're so incredibly smart that YC alumni seem stupid in comparison why can't you explain in a simple and easy to understand blurb what it is that your product does so that such confusion does not arise in the first place?
And so on...
" We came out of the interview dazed … neither I nor Daniele wanted to talk. My impression was that it was a complete disaster … two years of work, two years spent fighting for an idea that seemed impossible to become reality and in 10 minutes they had not even bothered to understand what we had in our hands. "
No, they did bother, you failed to explain. It's a communications problem on the sender side, the receivers would have been happy to understand you if you had taken the time and the trouble to explain it in their language rather than to expect them to accept the explanation in your language.
That's a pretty common mistake but it is unusual to see such a condenscending and frankly insulting attitude on the part of the person exhibiting the mistake. Your whole rant comes across as though you are somehow entitled to a certain treatment because of your technical expertise when in the real world what matters is how well you manage to communicate your achievements to your target audience (potential investors in this case) whoever they may be.
A few tips:
- turn down the rhetoric about how awesome you are until you have real world results, and preferably have others say how awesome you are
- go and work with your target audience instead of doing all your work behind closed doors
- focus on the product/market fit before you do more work
- get a dose of humility somewhere
- keep your dirty laundry in-house
Good luck!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These questions quite unambiguously pointed at YC never giving their application proper attention. Perhaps they skimmed it, but even then they should've picked up that the product was for non-developers. So to people who spent days writing the application and planning their life around the interview it would look like a half-ass effort on the YC part. It's only natural that they are pissed about the whole experience.…
Asking you to compare your product to Eclipse is not saying its similar to Eclipse. It's a conversation catalyst.
Clearly eclipse has nothing to do with their technology or product - it just showed ignorance. He even said prior to the remark, it was a application builder for people who don't code - yet they persisted.
YC do admit they make mistakes, and I think this is one of them. It was a terrible interview on both sides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's my reading of it too. When pitching your product, these types of seemingly ignorant questions should be exactly what you're prepared for. Responding with incredulity is a terrible way to win people over.
It seemed to me that the questions ( Eclipse? really? ) betrayed not just a lack of familiarity or ignorance, but a deep confusion as to technology in general. That question alone made me laugh, as if the person was raising their hand and saying, "I have no idea what I'm doing." I might possibly await that kind of response if they were pitching people with little-to-no technical background, but from YC I would have e…
My reading of it was that the HN interviewer was trying to give them opportunities to explain themselves whereas the answers were defensive and impatient.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These questions quite unambiguously pointed at YC never giving their application proper attention. Perhaps they skimmed it, but even then they should've picked up that the product was for non-developers. So to people who spent days writing the application and planning their life around the interview it would look like a half-ass effort on the YC part. It's only natural that they are pissed about the whole experience.…
Asking you to compare your product to Eclipse is not saying its similar to Eclipse. It's a conversation catalyst.
Perhaps the interviewer noticed that they missed the point and tried again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not just off, kind of ridiculous. I would be embarrassed if I were the YC interviewers.
Is this not just provoking, probing? i.e. translates as "so, why I am going to use this rather than an IDE? What's the demand here? What makes you different ?" as opposed to being a question to be taken literally.
These questions quite unambiguously pointed at YC never giving their application proper attention. Perhaps they skimmed it, but even then they should've picked up that the product was for non-developers. So to people who spent days writing the application and planning their life around the interview it would look like a half-ass effort on the YC part. It's only natural that they are pissed about the whole experience. One can hardly blame them.
An interview always has two sides, and my take-away from this is that YC looked, frankly, unqualified to hold the interview.
Sorry guys - if I was interviewing you as a YC partner, I'd pass on you too. You repeatedly express frustration that the interviewers were not intimately familiar with your application, but it doesn't seem if you put much into familiarizing yourself with YC and their flavour of logic. YC: Why are you spending so much time developing this application? Creo: It is not only an application, it is a compiler, a virtual ma…
To all you aspiring entrepreneurs, this is all you need to know: "Verify that there was an existing market opportunity in the form of real customers willing to pay you real money to solve a problem" Now, go!
Sorry guys - if I was interviewing you as a YC partner, I'd pass on you too. You repeatedly express frustration that the interviewers were not intimately familiar with your application, but it doesn't seem if you put much into familiarizing yourself with YC and their flavour of logic. YC: Why are you spending so much time developing this application? Creo: It is not only an application, it is a compiler, a virtual ma…
You seem to think that fast product iteration and testing with customers is the only way to go. It isn’t. The most ambitious projects sometimes need bold commitment. For instance if you want to create a space travel company, you will need funding way before you've finished your proof of concept. Now, maybe Y Combinator is simply not their market.
In their case there are many rapid app builders so it isn't crazy talk to enter that market. What is crazy talk is they haven't entered the market but are forming up on the beachhead (waiting for what?) and (critically) applying for YC before they have tested the market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seemed to me that the questions ( Eclipse? really? ) betrayed not just a lack of familiarity or ignorance, but a deep confusion as to technology in general. That question alone made me laugh, as if the person was raising their hand and saying, "I have no idea what I'm doing." I might possibly await that kind of response if they were pitching people with little-to-no technical background, but from YC I would have e…
Actually I think the question about Eclipse was an opportunity being handed to them on a plate - rather than reacting defensively they should have explained the downsides of existing development tools and why their approach is so much better. My reading of it was that the HN interviewer was trying to give them opportunities to explain themselves whereas the answers were defensive and impatient.
> We entered the room and facing us there were 3 young boys in their early twenties. I wonder if YC considers applicants' age when pairing them with the interviewers. Because if not, that's a very fertile soil for all sorts of interesting biases.