51–60 of 99 posts
http://jetpackgallery.mozillalabs.com/jetpacks/55
I'd say it didn't take off because it requires the user to have firefox, install jetpack, use igoogle, and be annoyed by all that wasted space etc :)
I wouldn't say it failed. I use it at work and home, and I love it :)
http://BuyersVote.com Chicken/egg problem with reaching critical mass. My plan was/is to grow it organically with long tail keywords once Google starts indexing all the pages. But they haven't done that yet because the site doesn't have enough incoming links to warrant indexing 1000 pages (another chicken/egg problem :)
http://wunbar.com Quick and simple to make, thought I could make some money on referral fees, but went nowhere. Failure, I suppose: browsers can do the same thing, with a little setup; and, more importantly, people seem to have a preference to navigate to each of these sites and search them directly.
I set something like this up myself with a Safari plugin. One thing I learned rather quickly: nobody searches with capital letters, so hitting the shift key to make a ":" is a pretty big cost. Just use "g ", and detect prefixes you know; it's much faster and less awkward to use.
I actually got the web slice accepted into the IE addons gallery (http://www.ieaddons.com) after waiting a couple months for approval. Then I made a small revision to the entry, and for some reason that made it go back into the "pending approval" queue. I sent several emails to the website support contact and got no answers. Months later, Amazon came out with their own extension. I finally got a response from a Microsoft rep after escalating with a friend, and they told me about how my extension can't be posted due to a partnership agreement. Pretty lame.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I set something like this up myself with a Safari plugin. One thing I learned rather quickly: nobody searches with capital letters, so hitting the shift key to make a ":" is a pretty big cost. Just use "g ", and detect prefixes you know; it's much faster and less awkward to use.
Parang? http://hannesp.se/parang/ The guy who wrote it mentored me when I was a programming noob.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To make it indexable you need users to enter in text. Maybe you could have a mini wiki above the search results, where users describe the search they are trying to do or what the search means, or can annotate the search. With your current UI this would be really hard. I feel like the UI is cool on first blush but sort of limits your options as far as experimentation goes. Just brainstorming here: - maybe the hook cou…
I actually built another site around most of those ideas you just mentioned (but changed the idea to films, as I found they worked better): http://filmvsfilm.com/ It's basically all user-generated-content, and it actually does rank on Google for a few things, but it's the wrong kind of traffic: People aren't in buying mode, very few visitors actually click through to Amazon and buy something.
These are basically A/B tests.
I built a Twitter client that filters out everything in your feed except for Tweets including urls or photos. It's pretty good way of just finding the interesting stuff in your Twitter feed. http://blurl.me
I've got a personal todo application that's aimed for lazy people. I've seriously tried a dozen of "smart todo", and no one were good for me. The one I built is special because it is so simple, flexible, and it does more than what a paper agenda can do. I could publish it but I would need to modify lots of thing to make it intuitive for new users, write docs, and basically just to make it "public".
Turns out we had an audience whose blogs were composed of copying lyrics and changing colours. You can guess not many really used it.
Oh well. SP went out of business a while after so I never had a chance to do what the audience really wanted (a like button)