Stypi (YC S11) Is Etherpad Reborn
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
Etherpad is alive and well, and it's totally F/OSS - Etherpad Lite was just released and it's SUPER easy to embed in your own apps: https://github.com/Pita/etherpad-lite
To get real for a minute. They may be able to make this into a nice money making niche product. There's plenty of open source products that people still pay money for. Just look at OSS content management systems.
As root:
Okay, two words and we've just lost 98% of the computer users in the world.
Install all dependencies. We need the sqlite develob libraries, gzip, git, curl, wget, libssl develop libraries and python:
... and now we've lost most of the remaining 2%.
"SUPER easy" for you, "SUPER easy" for me, but the other 99.98% of the potential customers would also love to use the product.
1) This is a YC company after a couple months. They'll continue to refine the product; imagine if Facebook had gotten set in stone back in 2007, released code, and didn't themselves continue to develop. I love F/OSS for some things, but this isn't the kind of software which usually gets developed well entirely by the OSS community -- it's design/UI/UX heavy.
Even if it were just a 100% clone today (which it isn't, it's better and worse in different ways), I'm excited what it will be in 6mo.
2) Social community and network effects are a whole lot more likely for this than for an embedded app. Again, standalone Facebook is way less interesting than facebook.com.
This is going to be a friggin' boon for phone interviews.
Let me hit ctrl-I while typing, type something and have it appear in italics, and then hit ctrl-I again to turn off italics. Likewise for bolding, though I use less of that.
Let me apply URLs.
Do this (while keeping it fast and without introducing any bugs worse than Google Docs sometimes crashing and IEtherpad sometimes going unresponsive) and I will switch.
It was great for 30 mins but after that we started to get connectivity issues and had to move to TitanPad. Once it's more stable I'll switch for sure though.
If not, is it because iterative 'also ran' stuff is a safer investment?
Great job guys!
Collaborative code editing, in particular, is really an unsolved problem, so I can't wait to see where this goes.
Maybe I just lack vision, but I don't see how this app can possibly pull in big revenue. Can someone please prove me wrong?
Google docs
PiratePad
collabedit.com
primarypad.com
TypeWith.me
Sync.in
EtherPad Foundation
iEtherPad.com
titanpad.com
etherpad.tugraz.at
etherpad.mozilla.org:9000
sketchpad.cc
okfnpad.org
pad.telecomix.org
twiddla.com
...
Now the real question that I'd love to be be answered is - why would anybody fund this?Not to put too fine a point on it, but, it's easy to see why you wouldn't invest in it: because you can't afford to put that much money behind a 1:10 or 1:15 risk. But that's exactly the problem every VC firm in the world has: finding the right set of 1:10 bets to put their money behind.
I feel like, if you're going to complain about people funding stuff like this, you're really complaining about the whole VC model. And sure, I don't like it either. So go build a company without it. Plenty of us here have or are doing exactly that.
The question is why do you or anyone else believe that this is a distinct possibility -- i.e. given this team, this product and this vision, why does someone with money believe that this represents a good bet?
I agree with your assessment of the VC's challenge. However, VCs don't put money into every long bet that comes their way. The different between a 1:2 bet and a 1:10 bet is obvious -- distinguishing a 1:10 bet and a 1:10000 bet is where the art comes in. (That is distinguishing a long but feasible proposition from bullshit.)
Even if 50%+ of the opinion-holding population disagrees.
Because they are unmitigated narcissists, it never enters their mind that perhaps there are factors unseen to them that make the analysis more complicated for those other people.
I think this is related to what Nassim Taleb calls "epistemological arrogance" -- refusing to question the validity of one's own knowledge, despite significant evidence that one's knowledge may be insufficient or invalid, e.g. 50%+ of the population has a different opinion, or people with a compelling need for high-quality knowledge (VCs, in this case) are arriving at different conclusions.
For concrete examples of this, see the comments on HN article which involves a discussion of race or gender relations.
You must also realize that the sites I listed is just a small percentage, something I googled in 2 minutes. There are many many players in the collaborative editing "market".
That didn't stop Google from making hundreds of billions of dollars off search 15 years later.
When investors look at a company, they look at what it could become, not what it is now. Most gigantic megacorps started as tiny niches that nobody ever believed they could make money from.
And I'll ask again - what's so groundbreaking about this project?
The reason they were founded was that they convinced the investors that their plans and ambitions go beyond what they've built so far.
It's a remarkable lack of imagination to not see a potential in a good, collaborative web editor. Sure, if they don't ever write a single line of code, it's not going to be anything special. But they probably will and they probably have many ideas on how to move this project forward.
An obvious evolution would be to turn it into a web-based IDE, competing with the likes of cloud9.
Or they could make it an embeddable editor widget usable by others (it's surprisingly difficult to build a decent web-based editor and a lot of web-based software (a forum, a commenting system, q/a sites) needs a good editor).
Or many, many other possibilities. Stop thinking of it as a finished product. Think of it as a first step in a thousand-step journey and try to imagine what the other 999 steps could be.
You keep talking about the future possibilities, but you fail to point out what gives this particular project that edge. What is it?
I, for one, believe that collaborative editing should have been added to every authoring application, not just editors, 10 years ago. I still use shared screen sessions for that.
Clearly this is just a start, a way to have something running and make people talk about it, a way have real users testing their technology... And being a YC startup help having a relatively large audience even for this kind of launching with an uninteresting product, so the real world technology testing will work, and I'm pretty sure that's all they care about for now.
When they start developping plugins for other apps using the same already-tested-and-approved techno, it will get interesting. This seems to me like a case of "launch now, code later", which in this context may be a good idea.
Oh, and by the way, I'd like an Emacs Lisp implementation and an open protocol (and a unicorn).
As everyone else replying to you has noted, these guys have grander ambitions. So does Simperium — they aren’t just doing Simplenote (see http://simperium.com/). (Full disclosure: I contracted with them in the past)
And this product does it out of the box. I've worked for four years remotely, and with OSS projects, and this has always been a niche that needed to be filled. I've tried subethaedit (requires someone to have open ports to host), coda (which uses subethaedit's libs under the hood), vim + screen (requires having a server + logins), etherpad (no code highlighting), and git+tight sync times, or just ever more towering pages of gists.
Having a websocket based collaborative code editor with line numbers and syntax highlighting is 95% of the way there, where as everything else is at best 75% there.
So, yeah. I would pay money for this.
I've successfully pair programmed via skype screensharing, but the image compression can often be a problem (as well as refresh rate), and there's no way to actually share work/alternate control in a pair.
It sort of works, but gets like a 65-70% score from me. Can get the job done, but seriously inhibits productivity due to lack of features.
Lots of competitors is a sign there's something here that people want. Unless the incumbents are protected by some barrier to entry, the winner will be whoever executes best, even if they are a late arrival.
I have a hard time at the moment trying to figure out what benefits this has over Etherpad clones or Google Docs. I'm sure there's a use case that they're trying to tackle, but it's not obvious to me.
"What's this?! You dare call yourself a startup? You're attempting to solve a problem which other people have attempted to solve before, and your solution looks like something two guys could have made in three months! Why are you in YC and not me?!"
In other words a text editor is one instance of an application that can use the underlying service. Think about that for a second. The concept of collaborative editing as a service that can be adapted to ANY application is HUGE. For example, an engineering CAD app would be more powerful with this feature.
Going further,if you consider that machines can also "collaborate" then it get's even more interesting. An example of human/machine collaboration could be a real-time reporting application.