101–110 of 355 posts
For example, sometimes the .com domain just seems too corporate sounding -- but your audience is not. Isn't it more strategic to get a newer extension?
> How do you find them? One answer is the default way to solve problems you're bad at: find someone else who can think of names. Imagine a website where startups could describe what they do and users could propose and vote on ideas for names. It's been on my list of potentially decent project ideas.
Already done, see http://www.pickydomains.com/
I couldn't disagree more with this article and am kinda surprised Paul wrote about this. Domain names are transitioning into becoming useless. When you open any web browser or mobile phone and go to look for a company it does a search. The most relevant results come back at the top. This type of trend, as we abstract away from using TLDs, is only going to continue. Owning a .com isn't nearly as meaningful today as it…
And this goes to show you - most people will not accept an advice from someone who knows better. If a conclusion must be reached, it must be reached under your own power, and at your own speed. This just can't be helped, it seems. Or can it?
I'm not sure. I'd rather have a memorable name with a sub-par TLD, than I would have a confusing / hard to remember name with a .com. Obviously, the ideal is memorable + .com, but most of those will cost 50-100k+, which is not feasible for seed-stage budget. Sounds like a series A problem.
> It turns out almost any word or word pair that is not an obviously bad name is a sufficiently good one, and the number of such domains is so large that you can find plenty that are cheap or even untaken. So make a list and try to buy some. That's what Stripe did. (Their search also turned up parse.com, which their friends at Parse took.)
Great names are made not found. I think Paul for once have it the wrong way around. If you become big enough and happen to have enough of a market you might need to .com name to optimize your numbers. If you happen to find a good name you can afford that you still think represents you and is .com you should most probably change your name. But for most people just like their logo it's it's not that important until you…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yeah. I heard this 13 years ago too. http://shirky.com/writings/domain_names.html So because someone suggested it 13 years ago makes it not true today? Look at how the new TLDs are working out; if you want to find a company using a funny TLD you just search for their name and unless the .com is higher ranked the company comes right up to the top. Look at it from a user's perspective; do you know anyone who actually…
> do you know anyone who actually types in a domain name anymore that isn't a technie? That's a problem. It means we rely more and more on search engines, thus centralising the web (and with it, the internet) more than it needs to be. Centralizing the network means centralizing the power. Not a good idea. It never was.
this is telling Just take a look at all these successful startups which either had a temporary domain name, or which still have a different domain name to their name: Square was squareup.com, DropBox was getdropbox.com, Facebook was thefacebook.com, Instagram was instagr.am, Twitter was twttr.com, Foursquare was playfoursquare.com, Basecamp is basecamphq.com, Pocket is getpocket.com, Bitly was/is bit.ly, Delicious wa…
