Love the Little Guys
An important idea that Getting Real discusses (in just two paragraphs—that’s how simple the book is) is to find the right customers. The corollary is that if you try to please everyone, you will not please anyone.
While that is well-known wisdom, how often is it forgotten in designing software? Because I have chosen DotNetNuke as Charlie’s enemy, I will use this software as an example. DotNetNuke attempts to be all things to all people. Its core and its modules support the development of small websites and the development of large websites. If you view the forums for this software, you will see that it does not provide the simplicity for small websites nor the flexibility for large websites. It attempts to please everyone, and ends up pleasing no-one. Well, the only people it pleases are gimmick-loving developers, but I have already argued that that is the wrong target for a website framework application.
Who will Charlie target? Charlie will target the websites created for individuals and small businesses.
The first and most important reason that Charlie will support individuals and small businesses is that this is what I enjoy. I enjoy having a small part to play in the individual’s life or the small business’s growth. If I were to target large companies, I would be a dispensable contractor, and where’s the fun in that?
The second reason that Charlie will support individuals and small businesses is that this is a market with little support. For large companies, DotNetNuke or Community Server would fit the bill. But both applications are overkill for the little guys.
But even a market description of individuals and small businesses is too broad a definition. Charlie would need to be an amazingly complex application to support all individuals and all small businesses. So, what is the subset of this market that Charlie will target? I have chosen two initial markets.
The first market is photographers. I have one personal reason and one professional reason for targetting photographers. The personal reason is that I adore photography. I find it such a beautiful form of art that it pains me to see some of the awful websites used to present such beauty. I want to do it better, for the sake of the photographer. The professional reason that I want to target photographers is that photography represents one of the hardest parts of a website framework. Any noodle can create an interface by which a website owner can add and edit the text of the webpage. But how to create an interface by which a website owner can upload an image, work with that image, and place that image on the webpage? I feel that if I can solve that challenge, the resulting interface convention can then be applied to both simple and complex administration challenges.
The second market is wine makers. Once again, I have one personal reason and one professional reason. The personal reason is that many wine makers are individuals who have a vineyard as a business on the side. These are the sorts of small businesses that I enjoy working with. The professional reason is that to provide a website framework for wine makers requires proper business objects including a bottle of wine and its tasting notes. I want Charlie to provide the wine maker with the option to “Add a new wine product,” and then properly present an interface by which the wine maker can add the product’s title, volume, bottling date, acidity, and so on. This is in stark contrast to giving the wine maker a rich text editor and telling him, “Type whatever you like.” This is where I see that I can make Charlie different from the rest. Most website framework applications effectively say to the website owner, “Look, we don’t give a shit what your business is about. We’ll just provide you with some tools so that you can write whatever you like.” I think that sucks, so Charlie is going to care about the business of the website owner.
After Charlie has successfully supported photographers and wine makers, it will be evolved to support other individuals and small business. Charlie will love the little guys.
by Alister Jones | Next up: Opinions and Preferences →
----
Hmmm very nice, but why not focus on one market first ??
They seems significantly different enough to split your attention in 2 completely different paths
You are quite right, and I do plan to focus on one market first. Which of the two I have mentioned, I don't know. I may end up simply flipping a coin. (After all this design and consideration, it would be nice to leave one aspect completely up to chance.)
Post a Comment