|
|
|
|
|
by quique
5293 days ago
|
|
1) We acknowledge the outliers like Lotus and YouTube, at least others have been life changing even if it wasn't billion dollar exits 2) Did you read previous comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3358703
Public data that was available to use as 'proxies'/indicators of value: User base, company size, funding, and acquisition amount...of course we'd like to show profit...a couple companies like Blurb submitted profit eg revenue 58M in 2010 3) It's not an us vs them comparison, again it's all about collaboration and multidisciplinary skills 4) Did you read previous comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3358727
-Of course the designers featured here can’t possibly take all the credit for any success, and they shouldn't, it's all about team work and we're celebrating design together no matter what background you come from -The goal is to raise awareness about the existence of designer founders and their diverse backgrounds with data in a fun way that has never been done before (not draw causal claims) |
|
The problem is that many of the companies you highlight are -inconsequential-. If you're going to make a claim about how much impact these companies have made, you can't turn around and name a bunch of duds[1].
You start the list with mega successes (Android and YouTube are ubiqutous products that have made a huge impact on millions of people) and then finish up with failures and unproven startups. To be clear, I'm not saying anything about design cofounders. It's just that there's this weird implication in what you've communicated. You're sort of saying that all these companies are in the same league due to the skill of one of the founders. Something about that just doesn't sit right.
========================================
[1] -
Sold in a talent acquisition after product failed: Hunch, Gowalla
Sold before they ever did anything: About.me
Niche community product: Forrst, ColourLovers, Foodspotting
Unproven product: Path