Apple releases Ipad 3 - <AUTHOR> http://www.apple.com/ipad/?r=3 <comment><USER2> It should be noted that the limited data plans for both AT&T and Verizon mean that at the max 4G speed of 73 Mbps, you could use all your bandwidth for the entire month in less than _three and a half minutes_ (2 GB plan).

The overages of $10/GB per month on both services mean once you go over your plan, you'll be looking at a little over $5/minute in new charges.

It is possible (though highly unlikely) to rack up over $200K/month in bandwidth charges if you managed to find an empty 4G cell for a month.

Sadly Sprint, which has unlimited 4G last i checked, was absent from the release of the new iPad.

<comment><USER3> Don't most people, really, use iPads over wifi? Or am I just one of the cheapskates who bought one without 3G or 4G support?

I bought an iPad 2 last year and I didn't even consider buying one with a data plan. I am near wifi about 99% of the time, discounting driving, hiking, and airplane time. In a pinch, I can check email on my Droid.

Eventually 4G will become inexpensive, but it isn't right now.

<comment><USER4> "Don't most people, really, use iPads over wifi?"

No. I don't use the work wifi because it is severely limited (paranoid IT guy) and my iPad may access material I'd rather they not sniff (just NOYB stuff). I use it on the road for mapping, impromptu parking-lot Grouponing, whatever far from wifi. Open routers still often have some irritant signin or blacklists. Even at home my iPad often gets 3G better than wifi.

Don't underestimate the value of "always connected". A legacy unlimited plan multiplies it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The world of LCD panels baffles me. For some reason Apple can sell an iPad with a 2048x1536 IPS screen for $500 but your average $1,000 laptop comes with a crappy 1366x768 TFT screen or maybe 1920x1080 if you're lucky.

<comment><USER6> Apple can commit to shipping millions of iPads and makes procurement decisions based on that fact. You're talking about the company that buys a significant proportion of the world's NAND flash production preordered a year ahead of time. iPad has enough economy of scale that as soon as Apple found a display manufacturer able and willing to manufacture the screen they wanted, they immediately promised a large enough preorder to make it cost-effective. Remember, Apple ships more iPads than any PC manufacturer ships total units, and _all those iPads use the same parts_.

So in case you were wondering why Apple keeps obscene piles of cash around, that's why.

<comment><USER7> Not anymore, they seem to be selling the new iPads and the old iPads, which will mean two display sizes. Still, your point holds.

The other issue is that Apple has enough money to invest in factories, not that it owns them, but it can put money up front to encourage building them. I would not be surprised if they had a 1 year hold on screens of this size, just as they did for the iphone 4 (although even today noone is using the same screens as the 4).

<comment><USER8> Yet, Im really interessted how Apple actually deals with its suppliers. My guess is that they are not really, well how should I put it, nice? to deal with. Judging from their enourmous growth AND their steady growing profits, Apple prouved an impressive upward flexibility. To manage that you have to be a pain the ass for your suppliers, yet you have to fair. Pretty cool how they walk that razors edge. Guess Apple dominace is a major for the competition in more than one way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The 264dpi screen is a big deal. I was at a workshop with Edward Tufte this week. He extoled the virtures of using paper for information-rich data transfer. Having paper-like screen resolution is an obvious advantage for disseminating information.

I'd like to see a startup take on PowerPoint by releasing software to compose iPad-friendly presentations. Think one-pagers full of text, graphs, and figures. On an iPad they could be interactive, annotated, and linked together. Every iPad-toting meeting goer could scan a QR code on the way in to get on the same page, and then sit and _discuss_ the content. Gone will be the days of presenters doling out bullet points at excruciatingly slow pace.

Having read Isaacson's biography of Jobs, it seems that Apple may be gunning to disrupt the textbook market. Having paper-like resolution is a great step in that direction.

<comment><USER10> Won't this make it hard for developers to develop apps on Macs that still have only 1920x1080 displays?

<comment><USER11> the simulator already offers multiple levels of zoom

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Although the HN title (currently) says "Ipad 3", Apple seems to actually be calling it the new "iPad" (edit: "new iPad", not "New iPad"). It's a bit confusing: next year, is it then the "old iPad"?

But, we don't really have that issue with many other Apple products (iPod nano, all Macs, etc) that use the same naming scheme. So we'll see how bad it actually ends up.

<comment><USER13> It looks like they're just calling it "iPad" now on their website. It's an interesting idea; maybe they plan on always calling the current one "iPad", and renaming the old model something like "iPad 2012" once the 2013 "iPad" is released.

<comment><USER14> The lack of a numbering scheme is a royal pain in the ass when googling bugs or trying to find pretty much any information about a specific model.

Although admittedly we already have that with most of their other devices ("do i have an early 2011 MB or was it the mid-2010?") and it's not like other vendors are much better in this regard.

<comment><USER15> There is a model identifier, it's just hidden in the system profiler (Mid 2011 air is MacBookAir4,2)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It's 10% heavier:

<http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/07/new-ipad-vs-ipad-2/>

Yes, I know why, but I was hoping against hope it would get a little lighter. But I didn't think it would. Maybe next year, when there's no reason to up the resolution.

<comment><USER17> It's still slightly lighter than the first iPad, so for those of us who didn't upgrade, it'll be an improvement. :)

<comment><USER16> Heh, yes, by 5%. :)

I think a nice weight would be about 400g. The Kindles are 200-300g, except the DX-2 which is 540g.

<comment><USER17> I prefer my Nook Toucho the iPad for pure text reading because it is so ridiculously light. But it would be tough to make the iPad 3 lighter than it is, without major breakthroughs in batteries or materials (lighter gorilla glass).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm still somewhat amazed they haven't found a better way to handle updating the store. I understand that there is a marketing aspect to taking it offline, but it should be back online and updated immediately after the event is over.

<comment><USER19> I think it IS all just marketing...Im sure a company that size can update a product on a website without going offline if they really wanted to

<comment><USER18> I think that's reading a bit too much into it. The product has been announced, having the store down now does nothing to promote it (as having it down during the announcement might), it only prevents people from buying it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> It's 'the new iPad', not the iPad 3. Apple is evidently going to follow the same pattern as it does with its computers and is doing away with a sequential numbering system.

So the next iPad will also just be 'the new iPad' the same way that every year we see 'the new MacBook Pro'. The iPhone will probably follow suit.

<comment><USER21> Apple is following the pattern that begun with the failure of the Apple III computer, which is to not name any more products "3". There was no Mac 3, iPod 3, or iPhone 3.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> No mention of bumping the RAM from 512 MB to 1 GB. Even my TF101 Tegra 2 tablet has 1 GB of RAM. I wonder how much the 4x larger retina display assets will increase RAM usage.

Edit: I guess it does have 1 GB of RAM. <http://chronicwire.com/the- ipad-3-has-1gb-of-ram>

<comment><USER23> I did a test a 1024x768 PNG vs the Same PNG at 2048x1536. 299k vs 664k. So for raster images it more than doubles the footprint, however if you use vector assets there should be little impact.

<comment><USER22> But you don't store compressed PNGs in RAM for display by the GPU. Does the GPU even support lossless texture compression? I would imagine it supports lossy texture compression.

Edit: It is also interesting to see that the ~ 2x increase in the size of the PNG can be explained by PNG's run length encoding. When you double the pixels in each direction, RLE should readily compress the horizontal pixel replication but not the vertical pixel replication.

<comment><USER23> It seems Apple uses a "modified" png standard for iOS (enabled by default) that compresses the images even more when they are added to the App Bundle. <http://iphonedevwiki.net/index.php/CgBI_file_format#Decoding>

<comment><USER24> True, though as jevinskie says, we're not talking here about the way images are stored on disk but about what needs to go in the GPU memory.

<comment><USER23> Totally understood, and I'm well aware of the increased memory footprint required once they are uncompressed. Way back in 08 when I was working on my first iPhone app you had to be very careful with memory a small animation with 120 images of 50k each could quickly max out the 50mb of usable memory the iPhone 3G had unless you cashed properly and released assets as soon as they were not in use. I should have been more specific in my original post.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I'm excited that they're addressing user complaints about 'content creation'. iPhoto looks particularly impressive; it looks like people will be using their tablet devices for more than just content consumption now.

<comment><USER26> What user complaints? The only people saying that the iPad can't be used for content creation are blogosphere commentators arguing that it can't replace a laptop yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Since the pixels are multiplied by 4, and the GPU only by 2, does this means the real world performance (in games) of the iPad 3 GPU should be _half_ the performance of iPad 2?

<comment><USER23> I doubt they are using the same GPU that's in the iPad 2,I suspect that they went with a higher end GPU and made it Quad. We will have to wait for a teardown to know with 100% certainty though.

<comment><USER27> A teardown won't tell you anything: it'll tell you that the GPU is in a chip called the A5X. You might be able to get a little more by pulling out an electron microscope, but iFixit doesn't go that far, yet. :)

It'll be the people doing software sleuthing that'll get you the answer.

However we are fairly confident that Apple didn't build their own GPU -- they would have bragged about it if they did. There are a limited number of GPUs IP blocks available for licensing, so that does mean that speculation can be relatively accurate. Their use of the term "quad-core" makes it highly likely they're using the SGX543MP4, twice what is in the iPad 2 (although perhaps higher clocked or with better memory bandwidth). That's also the GPU in the playstation vita.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Looks like the iPad2 is available for $399 now.

</comment><comment><USER29> Nothing mentioned about Siri. That is surprising, because I thought that inclusion would be a slam-dunk.

<comment><USER30> Not exactly true. It supports dictation just like the iPhone 4s.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Is it just me or do the comparison pics of the old iPad screen vs. new retina display on this page look exactly the same? <http://www.apple.com/ipad/features/>

Edit: never mind, there's a zoom widget I didn't notice.

<comment><USER32> Is the loupe showing up for you? It didn't for me the first time I loaded the page, and I thought the same thing you did.

It should look like this: <http://i.imgur.com/WUQ7n.jpg>

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Apparently it's just "iPad". Not 3, not HD. Maybe people will always call it the iPad 3 or maybe we'll end up calling it the 2012 iPad or the 3rd gen or something.

<comment><USER34> In one of the videos they mentioned it as the "third generation." Seems like they're just asking for confusion though.

<comment><USER33> Seems to have worked ok with the iPod ("generation") and their PC line (generally referenced by year of refresh). A bit confusing now when they're doing the transition from "2" to numberless which the first one was but in the long run it will pay off. I suppose they'll just keep calling it "new" to differentiate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I'm pretty psyched about the 1080p video. We just released our iPad app, which compresses video and shares it with people / teams, and my hope is that this will drive further adoption. Also, I want one, and I want to be able to share the video I take with it.

I do resent how poorly my iPad 1 performs now though. I only bought it 18 months ago!

</comment><comment><USER36> I'm always kind of surprised that the online store doesn't update instantly. I have to imagine that their "We'll be back soon" splash page kills a lot of potential impulse purchases.

It seems to be back now, but the iPhone is showing "From $0", and clicking on the iPad gives an "Oops" error page. Couldn't this all be worked out in staging?

<comment><USER37> > It seems to be back now, but the iPhone is showing "From $0"

This is actually the correct pricing for the iPhone, since the 3GS is available free when signing up for a 2-year plan from AT&T.

<comment><USER36> Ah interesting, thanks for the correction, it's been too long since I've bought one of those. I didn't realize that they were even supporting the 3GS anymore, let alone selling it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I hate it that I can't watch the videos on Apple's website, and to me, this is just a reminder of that, oh why?

<comment><USER38> Also, I do know why, but Linux user over here :P

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Pre-ordering will be a lottery. I've been trying to get to the online Store for more than half an hour and I get either server error, "we'll be back soon" or incredibly slow connection (which then fails). I managed to get once to iPad page but clicking on any link brought me back to server error.

<comment><USER22> The store went down just as the checkout page (page after the smart cover upsell page) was loading. I auto refreshed on that URL and was able to place my preorder a few minutes ago.

<comment><USER40> I stopped counting, but I must have started over a dozen times before I was finally able to check out. What I didn't know was that each walk through the iPad page was ordering another iPad, so my cart wound up with five of them (!) but thankfully removing the extra three didn't make me start over.

[Aside: The new Apple TV is impossible to order from the website because the page has no continue or buy button! Maybe they'll notice when first day sales are zero. You can add one to your cart from the Apple Store iPhone app, but so far I have been unable to check out. Apple seriously underestimated the order volume for these products!]

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Wonder how many are willing to upgrade from Ipad 2? I have an Ipad 2, I don't see a need to upgrade.

I am sure the tablet devices will follow a similar cycle as iPhone. Upgrade once in 2 years. I am beginning to wonder, the only aspects that might make me want to upgrade to IPad 4 next year, could be faster processor and more memory, thus making the overall experience better. I am sure Apple will have some exclusive software that will run only on their latest device (ex: Siri), that might force me to upgrade. Given how I use the Ipad right now - Videos, Netflix and eBooks (very limited browsing), I am ok with what I have now.

Will be good to know some statistics on how many upgraded to Ipad 2 from Ipad 1.

<comment><USER42> Most of us moving up from the iPad2 already sold our iPads.

<comment><USER41> Agree, that is an option to make it easier to decide to upgrade. The question is are you (and the others who sold their iPad2) gadget freaks that lust for new stuff, or do you really see a value in the upgrade.

What I am trying to figure out is, what keeps you(/me) wanting to upgrade to new tablets frequently, where as we are perfectly ok, running our 3+ year old Mac. Maybe the price point makes it more affordable to upgrade frequently.

<comment><USER42> I purchased the iPad2 despite being disappointed with the screen, but I knew I would use the device to death. I basically went into the purchase knowing I would be selling it in less than a year since apple products hold their value so well. So this upgrade does have a huge amount of value for me as the ipad2 display is very limiting.

I am sort of a 'gadget freak', but I force myself to be on a budget and that usually requires me to sell my devices pretty frequently. With that said, I will probably use the ipad3 for the 2 year cycle unless I'm not impressed with the ipad5 (doubtful).

I still have a 27" 2009 iMac that I absolutely love and probably won't be upgrading for a few more years (when desktop retina displays are common place). Once you get into the apple product cycle, if you buy early in the cycle and sell late, upgrades are not that painful. When I sold my netbook 2 years later I basically gave it away... that was painful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> I'm glad they didn't call it "iPad HD". Call me pedantic, but HD should be limited to ITU 'HDTV' broadcast spec, and the iPad 3's resolution doesn't fit. Instead it just confuses things with imprecise language.

</comment><comment><USER44> Everyone is speaking about bandwidth speed, but what about the first major product launch of the post-Steve era? What was your impression about it? A little bit of something clearly wasn't there if you ask me

<comment><USER45> I don't know. It was better than the last announcement, the day before Steve died. But then, I suspect that none of them were at their best that day. At any rate Tim seemed much more relaxed this time round. There were moments where he really did seem to be enjoying himself - the big thumbs up after the Siri Japan demonstration springs to mind, but there were a couple of other moments too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> The Apple Store was live for about two minutes but a DDOS from everyone trying to pre-order brought it down and they went back to "We'll be back soon"

I would love to see how many hits they are getting.

</comment><comment><USER46> "Quad-core graphics" seems like misleading marketing to trick people into thinking A5X is equivalent to Tegra 3; this seems like a shame since Apple could presumably win without it.

</comment><comment><USER47> Is me the only one was secretly hoping for tactile feedback?

<comment><USER48> You were not :) I was really hoping for it. All in all I think it was a very "play it safe" upgrade.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> Welp, this does it for me. As soon as i can get a completely carrier unlocked iPad in the bay area, I'm going to switch from my laptop (x61t) to this new iPad plus a dock and a BT keyboard and mouse. All I really need is an ssh/X-window server app, and I can run all my programs on my server or desktop.

</comment><comment><USER50> I think this link is titled wrong.

Nowhere is it referred to as iPad 3, iPad HD or anything like that. It's just "The new iPad"

</comment><comment><USER51> Does this not include an update to iOS?

<comment><USER52> It does; iOS 5.1 comes out today.

<comment><USER51> Link? Update to Safari (IndexedDB please)?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> In the presentation, Cook refers to the "new iPad" with no "3". Inside Apple, they probably have viewed what we call the iPad 1 and iPad 2 as the prequel 1 and prequel 2 to the actual iPad, which is only now finished.

</comment><comment><USER54> Does anyone know if OpenGL's 1024x1024 image size restriction is being raised as well? Seems pretty limiting to not even be able to make an image that's as big as the screen without tiling four of them together.

<comment><USER55> The max texture size has been 2048x2048 since the 3GS

<comment><USER55> Sounds like on the new iPad the max has further increased to 4096x4096

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> It sincerely bothers me that no where no the apple.com site, has Apple referred to his as the iPad 3. The closest thing to a new name that they've given is "The new iPad".

Please everyone stop calling this the iPad 3.

</comment><comment><USER57> Isn't the LTE migration in part a cost saving measure for carriers and later on the final user?

From what I remember, LTE does pump more data in a more cheap way; and the infrastructure for it is more cheap also.

</comment><comment><USER58> so Apple ditches Flash for HTML5, but requires Quicktime to play the Retina tech video?

<http://www.apple.com/ipad/features/>

<comment><USER58> yo dawg! we used quicktime to showcase your iPad3 so you can use apple proprietary tech while you watch apple proprietary tech.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> I'm wondering if my grandfathered unlimited plan with AT&T can be applied to the iPad?

</comment><comment><USER60> 1) It's spelled iPad. 2) It's not officially called iPad 3, just 'the new iPad'.

</comment><comment><USER40> Apple can't keep the Apple store up. Why are they surprised by the load?

</comment><comment><USER61> I wonder what the implications of this will be for web design?

A website built with a fixed with 1000 pixel design is suddenly going to look pretty silly on a new ipad.

Of course if you design around large resolutions you will marginalize those with standard displays.

<comment><USER62> It will work exactly like it does on the iPhone—if you specify 1000 pixels, it will be 1000 pixels wide on the non-retina iPads, and 2000 pixels on the new iPad.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Ouch, Just ordered 32gb 4g (AT&T) $780 with tax. If I were not using it for development it would hurt a lot more however it still is about double what I would be comfortable with for my own use.

</comment><comment><USER63> _Resolutionary_. What a godawful marketing department word. The first thing you see. I miss Steve.

<comment><USER64> It's not unprecedented. The Macbook Air was marketed with "Thinovation"

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> During iPhone 4S release, who cares about 4G. iPad HD, all hail 4G!

</comment><comment><USER66> I have four Android smartphones and two tablets, but this is the first Apple product that has really opened my wallet. Literally, my wallet is sitting open.

But their store keeps crashing and going back to the offline state. Called their phone sales and they couldn't help me because they use the online system to enter orders. :-)

Ah well, I'll get one soon enough.

<comment><USER10> What is it about it that made you want it so much? There will be Android tablets with just as high or higher resolution very soon, and with stronger CPU's than the still dual core Cortex A9 chip in the iPad 3.

<comment><USER67> It's like the megahertz war from way back when - you might have a CPU with 100% more megahertz but you're still using windows.

<comment><USER68> So continuing the analogy... Apple mobile products will switch to Android in about five years and their marketing won't miss a beat?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> It's spelled "iPad" and it's not the 3.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to get back to my Desk 4 and have some Breakfast 2.

<comment><USER45> I don't think he knows about second breakfast Pip

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> Apple releases Ipad 3 - and no one cares.

</comment><comment><USER71> It says a lot that the longest thread thread here is about data plans. I guess this is a logical iteration of the iPad 2 but they really seem to have left the door open for an Android manufacturer to leap ahead here. Both this and the 4S feel like Apple on autopilot.

<comment><USER26> What would suggest they should have done to stay ahead?

<comment><USER71> If I could answer that question I'd be Steve Jobs.

<comment><USER26> And yet despite not being Steve Jobs, you're certain they haven't done enough to stay ahead.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER72> I think Apple is doing a great thing by pushing up display resolutions. I can't believe that PC manufacturers still REFUSE to produce laptops (at least consumer grade) with any resolutions higher than 1366x768.

I've been watching consumer laptop sales for a year and the only one I've seen with a higher resolutions is a 17" beast. Luckily I got a 15" Macbook Pro from work with a 1680x1050.

Everyone's known since the iPhone 4 that Apple would do a hi-res Tablet display, but PC manufacturers still refuse to innovate and put in hi-res displays in their laptops.

I refuse to try to write code with only 768 vertical lines.

<comment><USER73> My year-old Dell XPS-15 has a 1920x1080 display (15") and is fairly "consumer grade". Granted it was an option, but still. Actually I have a problem with this screen - the font is too small (windows doesn't rescale automatically).

<comment><USER72> That's interesting to know. Still, considering the hundreds of models of laptops available, it's a very very small percentage that offer anything other than 1366x768. The Macbook's minimum resolutions is 1440x900 and they offer 1680x1050 as an option.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> Hooray! Another iteration of an expensive toy for tech managers trying to justify their jobs and people who think that money buys taste!

</comment><comment><USER75> I feel like apple is already slipping without steve jobs. calling the new ipad "the new ipad" certainly doesnt seem like a smart move (same goes with the iphone 4s - wouldnt you rather have an iphone 5?). and furthermore, there's again very little innovation in the device, the outside hasnt changed at all, albeit being a little thicker. just improving display resolution seems like a change most ipad2 users won't appreciate enough. I just feel like that apple is now just draining every penny from it's customers with small innovations and a huge brand - while still being unable to decide what to do with it's stockpiles of money.

<comment><USER76> I actually agree with you to a large extent (especially on the iPhone 4s), but a vastly improved resolution + substantially better hardware do constitute a legitimate incremental release.

You can't really expect them to do a full redesign with every product iteration, especially when they've obviously already landed on a local maxima of aesthetics and usability.

<comment><USER75> yes but it still feels like those are rather intangible improvements to the average consumer. will he care so much about improved resolutions and processor speed? speaking of aesthetics, I would love to see a screen without bezel on the side (like the galaxy s3).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER77> Why I will not be buying an iPad 3:

\- Resolution: Who cares. \- Camera: Who cares. \- 4GLTE with a ridiculous price and cap. No thanks

I don't think there's anything really compelling about the iPad 3 for the masses. Sure, they'll sell a bunch of them, mainly because, well, that's what they are selling now.

Being on WiFi most of the time I don't see any motivation to get an iPad 3 over my iPad 2. Most of the time the iPad 2 is used to casually browse the web on the couch, play chess and mess around with other games. In none of these use cases has the iPad 2 screen resolution proven to be an issue at all.

Once usage becomes more serious iPad 2 goes on the shelf and I/we switch to computers. All of our home computers are equipped with a minimum of two 24inch 1920 x 1200 pixel screens. There is no way the iPad 2 or 3 experience can compete with this at any level.

I think Apple needs to fix the issue of carriers gouging customers for connectivity. We have four iPhones and two iPads. Why are we paying six fixed- cost, limited usage data plans when the devices are on WiFi most of the time? Why is it that we can't buy a "family" plan, if you will, and pay one fee for connectivity. That's what you do with DSL: You pay one amount for a data rate and it doesn't matter if you have one or fifteen computers attached to the service.

The next revolution in mobile might not come until the recurring costs involved in using these devices come under control.</comment>


Carnegie Mellon creates fund to invest in its recent graduates - <AUTHOR> http://www.cmu.edu/news/archive/2011/May/may15_openfieldentrepreneurs.shtml <comment><USER2> One thing that's always upset me about CMU is how non-entrepreneurial they are. Google has a large presence there, and most major tech companies fly out for the job fairs, but startups are few and far between (Meebo and Palantir were the closest I saw 3 years ago).

I think a lot of it is a byproduct of their location: Pittsburgh is many years behind the valley on investor terms and incubator programs. As a result there are few startups there. Valley startups can't really afford to head out to Pittsburgh to recruit or promote entrepreneurship, especially when Stanford & Berkeley are a car ride away (ditto with Boston/MIT).

There are many great people working on this problem inside CMU, but it's an uphill battle. I'm curious what the terms of this investment will be. The worst thing CMU can do is try to force entrepreneurs to stay in Pittsburgh. Fix the attitude, then the location will fix itself.

<comment><USER3> Rich people would never want to live in Pittsburgh for many reasons, including that the culture of the place is in some ways morally opposed to the concept of rich people, the infrastructure is poor, the weather is always terrible, there is never any sun, and the food is terrible (often self-righteously so).

In other words, the cost of living is low because rent is low because there's no demand because no one wants to live here.

On top of all that, SV already exists, so if you were going to start a startup, there would be no reason not to start it there. And, once you exited there, you would have no reason to leave, and especially not in favor of Pittsburgh, of all places.

Thus, good investors, also known as angels, will never cluster here.

More on-topic, it seems like the CMU fund is going to have a committee of bureaucrats decide who to fund. Why would that ever be a good idea? I graduated from CMU and work there now, and if I started a startup and were offered money by said fund, I would reject it. They'd want me to go to an 'OFEF business workshop.'

<comment><USER4> I don't live in Pittsburgh, but completely disagree with your sentiments. I went to CMU '02, then lived in Shadyside for a few years, miss the place dearly and own a few properties there (they have appreciated significantly over the past 5 years... Pittsburgh has been an amazing real estate market during that time). Part of the reason it has appreciated is that it's doing exceptionally well during this downturn. Unemployment is 7.4%, almost 2 points lower than the nations average. San Francisco's is 10%.

Smart young successful people actually do live there, more so than it's comparison cities... It also has some of the most educated folks in that bunch- <http://www.pitt.edu/~cbriem/SelectedTables2.htm> You'll see it's in very good company among the top educated cities. Personally, a lot of my friends stayed in Pittsburgh and/or moved back after a few years. I personally was itching to leave many years ago, have lived in many places along the way and now miss the place dearly/will at some point move back.

There are a number of startups in Pittsburgh now, but not as many as there were during the .com bubble... there are many more than any other cities of its size, primarily because there is great talent coming out of CMU and Pitt. Your argument suggests that there is no reason for anyone to not locate to SV (which is totally fine, but I think many would disagree)

Here are some of the recent startups: [http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-hot- software-or-recent-sta...](http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-hot-software-or- recent-startups-in-Pittsburgh)

and some others: [http://www.quora.com/What-are-some-good-startups-out-of- Pitt...](http://www.quora.com/What-are-some-good-startups-out-of-Pittsburgh)

Re: food, you must be joking... Murray Ave right by CMU has more fantastic ethnic restaurants than anywhere I can think of ([http://www.urbanspoon.com/n/23/2226/Pittsburgh/Squirrel- Hill...](http://www.urbanspoon.com/n/23/2226/Pittsburgh/Squirrel-Hill-CMU- restaurants)), and Nine on Nine, Eleven, Paris 66, Salt of the Earth, and Bona Terra would be worthy of Michelin stars in another city, yet they are reasonably priced in Pittsburgh.

Re: weather you're spot-on... there are less sunny days in Pittsburgh than nearly anywhere... but it seems to work out OK for Seattle.

If this fund is indeed run by a bunch of bureaucrats it might end up being crap, as you suggest. Project Olympus at CMU has done some good stuff though, so I have hope. <http://www.olympus.cs.cmu.edu/probes/>

<comment><USER3> Yes, it has people with degrees, but no, it does not have many rich people. It has a few, and if they buy not-too-expensive houses and seem Pittsburghite- friendly, they are venerated. It did well in the recession because its economy is based on education and healthcare; this does not make it particularly good for startups.

Yes, it compares well to other cities of its size startup-wise, but we're comparing it to SV, which is not of its size, so nevermind.

Yes, there do exist nice restaurants, but we're comparing it to the Bay Area, and the mean, median, and top 10% quality of Bay Area restaurants is ridiculously high, so nevermind.

Pittsburgh's weather is worse than Seattle's. Yes, it is #2 to Seattle's #1 on the country's least-sunny list, but in Seattle, it just rains a lot, and whether or not it's raining, the air is palatable. In Pittsburgh, it's either freezing your nose off or making your eyes water with humidity.

The thing about being morally opposed to rich people is an instance of an observation I've heard from multiple people other than myself: Pittsburgh's message seems to be, stay here and be one of us, and don't think you can be any better than us, because we don't think that's possible, and in fact find the idea offensive.

Which is not exactly a startup-ish sentiment.

<comment><USER5> Comparing a town with ~300,000 people to a metropolitan area to a major city like SF/Bay Area isn't exactly a fair fight. Obviously SV is going to be better at almost everything. Compared to almost any city its size, Pittsburgh is awesome as far as cost of living, culture, education, and food go.

And your sentiments about the culture here are a bit off. It's definitely much more blue-collar than SV, which may be why you get that impression. But it's a far cry from being anti-ambitious.

<comment><USER3> The whole point is that you can't compare a town with 300k people with a blue- collar culture to the Bay Area. It's not even close to as good for startups. Why is this controversial?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > CMU spin-offs represent 34 percent of the total companies created in > Pennsylvania based on university technologies in the past five years.

CMU has helped Pittsburgh rebrand itself from a coal-mining, steel-working town to a technological hub. I'm glad to hear that they want to continue the trend.

<comment><USER7> As I am in this year's graduating class, I was immensely excited to hear this news. Carnegie Mellon's greater fostering of entrepreneurship through initiatives such as this and the relatively new Engineering and Technology Innovation Management program (masters program with classes in Tepper, one of the top graduate business programs, and a required internship at a startup) will prove very fruitful. If we could just also get Google Fiber to come to Pittsburgh, it would be possible to start to see another great entrepreneurship hub form.

<comment><USER8> What does Google Fiber have to do with it?

Just curious, as the internet access was plenty fast at CMU 15 years ago when I was there, so I can't imagine it is worse now. And of course these days you host virtually (hah) everything in EC2 or the like, so local bandwidth should never be a limiting factor.

Perhaps I'm just sensitive on this topic since I've been using an (at best of times) 100k connection in Rwanda starting a software company here.

<comment><USER7> It's average now, slightly better than a base Comcast connection, but that's about it. (I can compare directly since I lived on campus two years and off the last two). I suppose it would depend on what you were doing that would make it matter whether Google Fiber was important or not, but certainly for running large scale things, especially simulations from cloud based sources, Google Fiber would be massively appealing. I'd argue that the effect of ultra high speed internet on a large population base isn't predictable and could only be a positive for the region in terms of drawing developers et al. Also, thank you for laughing at your pun instead of crassly saying "pun not intended."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This reminds me, I have had an idea for advancing science through investing in graduate students and I would love to get some feedback on it.

How about creating a foundation that gives grants to students to support them while they get a Masters or PhD in two branches of science?

My assumption is that encouraging people to get high degrees in two or three branches of science will help bridge the 'specialization gap' that now exists between the branches. People on this program will be able to apply one area of science to another, which may create amazing applications.

How many people are there who have a PhD in biology _and_ a PhD in computer science? What about PhD's in mathematics and robotics?

I would apply immediately to anything resembling this.

<comment><USER10> There are interdisciplinary PhD programs that are now gaining popularity. For example, I work on protein structure prediction in my graduate program, which involves lots of programming, robotics algorithms, machine learning, HPC, etc. as well as biochemistry, statistical thermodynamics, and molecular biology. If I were to drop out right now, I could find employment as anything from a software developer to DNA sequencing technician.

<comment><USER9> These are a pretty good start. What I had in mind is an organization that gives long-term grants for many areas of study. Of course, any returns on this kind of investment would be ten to fifteen years away, which would make it hard to find anyone to support it. And worse, we do not know if a we can have a good return on this kind of investment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> There are several comments here concerned that CMU might want to keep their startups rooted in Pittsburgh. However, they have a Silicon Valley campus <http://www.cmu.edu/silicon-valley/> which seems to demonstrate that they have some interest in supporting those who want to be in the valley.

</comment><comment><USER12> Glad to hear this - I hope other schools follow along in their footsteps. This is a good way to both invest in graduates, and improve the money problems many schools are facing (though, this is more of a long term result.)

</comment><comment><USER13> Georgia Tech (my college) recently announced a similar thing. Basically a Y-Combinator for students and alumni. More details at flashpoint.gatech.edu (Website doesn't launch till tuesday, so you'll have to be patient)

</comment><comment><USER14> Might actually be more efficient than begging for alumni donations. I would have let CMU put some dollars into my latest thing.

</comment><comment><USER15> I heard President Cohon talk about it in today's commencement ceremony. That's great news!...to me :) (I'm a CMU alumni, CS School)

</comment><comment><USER16> I'm wondering whether this fund excludes those in need of H1bs.

</comment><comment><USER17> So this is yet another scheme where bankers grab ownership of fledgling companies at a massive discount because the visionary founders don't yet realize their company is worth far more than is being offered. Meanwhile press releases go out making it seem like it is some sort of non-profit charity that is doing good and the investors philanthropists.

<comment><USER18> Hey, if you think these companies are being bought up at massive discounts, why don't you go to Pittsburgh and put your money where your mouth is? Invest 'em in yourself, at twice the going rate, and I'm sure the founders will be happy to take your money.</comment></comment>


Ramen Profitable - <AUTHOR> http://paulgraham.com/ramenprofitable.html <comment><USER2> Having gone down both the ramen-profitable and the traditional-VC roads, here are some pitfalls that deserve mention with the former. The two are not mutually exclusive, and the angel/VC road has its own well-known brambles, but anyway:

\- Your biggest fear should not be flaming out spectacularly, but rather creating a zombie that neither truly lives nor dies. The downside of ramen profitability is that (by definition) it's easier to waste years rather than months on an idea that won't ultimately succeed.

\- In fact, you may lose your window of opportunity to someone who figures out how to use cash to get further faster.

\- Outside investment forces you to get your head out of the day-to-day firefighting every month or so to 1) think big picture 2) set long term goals 3) be accountable for your progress. The key is "outside"; otherwise it's easy to meander along and procrastinate on hard questions.

\- The upside of ramen profitability is a culture of frugality. The downside is it's easy to waste time on things you could be paying others to do. For example, paying an accountant to do your company taxes might blow away the entire year's earnings -- does that mean you should learn the tax code and do it yourself? What about negotiating a contract, or even taking out the trash? (These are real examples of things we did ourselves at the ramen-profitable company.) Delegating is harder if it means losing your hard-earned badge of profitability.

Joel has a good post on this topic (Amazon vs. Ben & Jerry's): <http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000056.html>

<comment><USER3> "Your biggest fear should not be flaming out spectacularly, but rather creating a zombie that neither truly lives nor dies."

I think the pitfall you are alluding to is hitting ramen profitability and then spending all day fire fighting rather than creating new features. But that is the point to seek funding with specific goals for the money and new plans of attack ($x will allow me to hire y who will write z feature). And since you are ramen profitable, you can do so on your own time schedule with better terms! This then allows you to flame out spectacularly :)

<comment><USER4> "I think the pitfall you are alluding to is hitting ramen profitability and then spending all day fire fighting rather than creating new features."

I don't think that's what he's alluding to at all. He's talking about business success, not how you spend your time. There are plenty of people who create products for small markets and can't make the growth jump past that early small market into a larger one. This isn't always (or even OFTEN) a feature- creation problem.

Here's some cool math: If your acquisition is linear ("we sign up 3 paying customers every day") and your churn is percentage ("we lose 8% of our paying customers every month") you will eventually hit a point where your growth STOPS (unless you can fix one of those two stats). The zombie state Drew is talking about (I think) it where your revenue is largely not growing, you can feed yourself but no one is ever going to buy you, and you've run out of "move-the-needle" features/efforts that can improve acquisition or retention. "Walking Dead" is what investors call it.

<comment><USER3> That is certainly a scenario but if your startup has stopped growing and you don't have plans for new features to change that then you are walking dead. Then, as you pointed out, you know you have entered a market too small.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> An awesome alternative to rice and beans, just to throw in some variety, is rice and dal (lentils or split peas). The dal requires several spices, so it's a good idea to invest in a good spice collection. Actually its always a good idea to invest in a spice collection.

Anyway, my favorite dal recipe is thus (six servings, keeps forever):

1 1/2 c. dried lentils/split peas/etc...

4 c. water

1 1/2 tsp salt

3 tbs butter/oil

1 tsp cumin seeds

1 tsp ground tumeric

a small stick of cinnamon (or 1/2 tsp ground cinnamon)

1/4 tsp cayenne pepper

1/4 tsp fresh/ground ginger

1/4 tsp mustard seeds

6 cloves

Cook the lentils. Cook some rice. Heat the butter in the pan and then fry all the spices until the cumin and mustard seeds begin to pop. Pour the spice mixture into the lentils and mix. Possible toppings include: plain yogurt with dill (dried or fresh) diced cucumber, any variety of chutney. I'd add a recipe for chutney, but the cooking and canning process is too long to put here.

This stuff is so filling and delicious (if you like Indian/Nepalese food), and it lasts forever in the fridge.

<comment><USER6> The point is to spend all your time working on PRODUCT and not cooking. Otherwise a pot does a better job of cooking rice than a rice cooker, and dried beans beet canned hands down. But those things take time. Were talking bare sustenance, to support that weak flabby life support system programmers call a body until the attached brain has finished making a product.

<comment><USER7> Sounds like a "recipe" for disaster (excuse the pun).

Part of success is learning to strike a balance that allows you to spend a lot of time on your product but also leave time for maintaining your personal health and sanity. You can't go full force, full time for very long without burning out. The pitfalls have been discussed here a lot.

Cooking can be excellent opportunity to take a break from your work to refresh and nourish your mind, and also learn a new and valuable skill in the process.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> _What keeps people from starting startups is the fear of having so much responsibility._

I'm not convinced about this. I think if anything it's the exact opposite -- many people avoid starting startups because they're afraid of seeming _irresponsible_.

I'm sure I'm not the only person here who has been asked the question "when are you going to get a _real_ job?" -- as PG's essay points out a paragraph earlier, a company which isn't making any money yet tends to feel rather theoretical. At an age where the perception of being responsible is largely tied to making the transition from education to employment, it can be difficult to explain working at a not-yet-profitable startup to people -- especially in computing, where the default expectation is often that students will graduate and walk into high-paying jobs with Google/Facebook/Amazon/Microsoft/Cisco/etc.

<comment><USER9> We're talking about two difference senses of responsibility. You mean responsibility in the sense of prudence; e.g. "He made a responsible choice." I mean responsibility in the sense of something you have to worry about; e.g. "He was weighed down by responsibilities."

For anyone who cares, the reason both concepts have the same name is that they share the property that you have to be able to respond to someone. The difference is that in the first case you're responding to people who are judging or depending on your choice (e.g. your parents, friends, or dependents) and in the second to people you've undertaken to do something for (e.g. customers, employees, or investors).

<comment><USER8> _I think we're talking about two difference senses of responsibility._

Well, yes. But they're closely related -- people with lots of responsibilities have to be responsible, or else bad things will happen.

<comment><USER9> Yes, they are related, but not in a way that makes your comment true.

When your parents think you're being irresponsible by starting a startup instead of getting a job, they're thinking about the affect on your own career, not the amount of work you're undertaking to do for other people.

<comment><USER8> _When your parents think you're being irresponsible by starting a startup instead of getting a job, they're thinking about the affect on your own career, not the amount of work you're undertaking to do for other people._

I'm not convinced that is generally true. Note that I'm talking about perceptions, not reality. I don't think many people avoid startups because they're afraid of _being_ irresponsible -- I think they avoid startups because they're afraid of _seeming_ irresponsible -- and I think a lot of this is based on the perception that a startup which hasn't reached profitability yet (especially if it doesn't have any paying customers yet) isn't a real company.

<comment><USER10> Wait, who cares about _seeming_ irresponsible? Unless it's to one's family, in which case pg's argument holds.

<comment><USER11> _who cares about seeming irresponsible?_

The "students [expected to] graduate and walk into high-paying jobs with Google/Facebook/Amazon/Microsoft/Cisco/etc".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I realise this is probably the least relevant comment this essay is going to get... but you can make good rice in the microwave - the only advantage a rice cooker has is that it will keep your rice warm for hours.

Get a deep microwave-safe _covered_ dish (your grandmother probably has some old corningware lying around, also easy to find in garage sales), put 2 cups of water for every cup of rice (but don't fill more than half the dish), a bit of salt, a bit of olive oil, cover and microwave. Some microwaves have a rice setting, otherwise microwave on high for about 10 minutes _and then let stand_ for at least 10 minutes.

If you are making white rice, it will turn out nicer if you rinse it before you start (that washes away the starch); a trick for doing this is using a sieve and a bowl. In some cultures it is traditional to rinse the rice 7 times - I find 6 is less symbolic but equally adequate.

I now return you to your normal programming.

<comment><USER13> Someone please tell me how a microwave or rice cooker are better than just using a normal old covered pot with a clear lid. I seem to be able to make decent rice if I just very closely follow the correct rice/water/heat/time ratios.

I figure the microwave is faster, but I don't think the rice cooker would be. I guess if you constantly eat rice, not having to pay attention is a plus?

<comment><USER14> If you cook rice more than once per week, and you're doing it with a pot, you're a masochist. A rice cooker makes the process dramatically less error prone, and the resulting rice is better: fluffier, more consistently cooked, etc. A girlfriend bought me a fuzzy logic rice cooker (about $150, I think) a few years back. Best kitchen device _ever_. It cooks brown rice, oatmeal, etc. in addition to white rice, and it gets it right every single time. The pan also has measurement marks inside so I don't even have to measure the water.

The big problem with a pot is that you'll often get the temperature wrong, and end up baking the lower layer of rice onto the pot bottom, or not quite cooking it fast enough and end up with mushy rice. I only get great rice from a pot about 75% of the time. It's 100% of the time with a rice cooker.

So, yes, not having to pay attention to the rice while I work on other parts of the meal is a huge bonus. If you only need white rice, you can get a basic rice cooker that will work very well for about $25 (I've heard brown rice is possible with the lower priced devices by giving it a bit more water, and leaving it to "warm" for a few extra minutes, but I've never tried it).

<comment><USER15> _A girlfriend bought me a fuzzy logic rice cooker (about $150, I think) a few years back. Best kitchen device ever._

Single-use kitchen products are silly, not to mention space-inefficient. Even if it makes oatmeal _and_ rice, that's basically just a bunch of starch. Might as well just eat Ramen.

One can find a nice set of sturdy department-store quality cookware (with lids!) at a discount retailer (like Ross or Marshalls). They'll go much further in ensuring consumption of the variety of nutritional foods. Basics one can get for about $60 for all three: a boiling water pot for the stuff to be cooked in bulk, a saucepan (cause bland rice is boring) and wok-shaped skillet. They fit neatly inside each other space-wise, as well.

My secret to rice cooking: add a wee bit of vegetable or other oil (I also like to add a bit of cayenne pepper to the oil sometimes) in the skillet, and let it warm, but not over super hot temp. Then add the rice, and kind of "sautee" it for a little while, but keep the rice moving to make sure it doesn't burn. You really just need coat it a little little bit, to prevent it from going mushy and therefore cannot coat the bottom of the pan with the black mush that happens when the rice is added to the water. After adding the water and bringing it up to a boil, you can turn it down to the lowest temp on your stove, cover it, and let it cook for the rest of the time on the package.

I guess the one prevailing great thing about the fancier rice cookers it that they beep when they're done. So I guess if you use my method, don't forget to set a timer.

<comment><USER14> _Single-use kitchen products are silly, not to mention space-inefficient._

I agree, which is why I called it out as one of the few instances where it is worthwhile. And speaking of pots and pans, Cuisinart makes a great set of pots and pans, covering everything you need, that sells for $149 from Amazon. That, and a good knife, and a few other bits and pieces, are most of what you need to have a nice cooking kitchen for dinner for a group of up to about four (and the two small ones are good for single and double meals).

To put things into perspective, I don't even own a microwave. But, I consider a rice cooker absolutely mandatory if you eat rice regularly. If you don't eat rice regularly, then obviously a rice cooker is not a useful expenditure or use of space. I consider it a good investment of both, because my most common meals are various kinds of Chinese, Indian, and Mediterranean foods that include rice as a base.

 _Even if it makes oatmeal and rice, that's basically just a bunch of starch. Might as well just eat Ramen._

I'm not a believer in the Atkins anti-carbs crusade, nor do I accept that all grains are created equal. Oatmeal and brown rice are both quite reasonable "slow" carbs, when combined with proteins and vegetables. Ramen is not a slow carb by any stretch of the imagination, and is actually "just a bunch of starch" (it also has _way_ too much sodium, if prepared as directed).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This may be a new concept for men, but I think women have long gone for "ramen profitable". They very often bootstrap their businesses. They usually can't get the same level of credit a man can get. They are often doing it because they are moms who want to be home with the kids, so their first responsibility is to their family, not their business. This means they can't put sufficient time and energy into the business to launch something on a more traditional male model of success (which means they often have no goal to expand from their home office to a more traditional setting). They tend to be more risk- averse than men, in part because they just don't have as much capacity to recover from a big financial mistake as men tend to have. (If women make on average 2/3 what men make, then men are making 1 1/2 times what women make.)

It seems to me business articles aimed at women might be a useful resource for anyone wanting to start a "ramen profitable" business.

<comment><USER17> I think your observations are probably correct.

When I was trying to learn basic accounting / bookkeeping, one of the best guides I found was some State's "Women in Small Business" or something similar commission, that had a very short down-to-earth guide to doing enough bookkeeping to keep you out of tax court.

This also reminds me of the buzzword "lifestyle business" that was going aroudn a while back.

<comment><USER16> I've read a lot about it over the years, some of it a very long time ago. So no specific titles come to mind. But, in my experience, articles aimed at would-be women entrepreneurs tend to take the bootstrap approach. It's probably an excellent approach during a recession.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Sorry PG, but I have to nitpick the recipe in the footnotes. In general this is a healthful meal. I was particularly pleased to see you recommended keeping the heat low when sauteing, as heating oils beyond their tolerance is a common mistake.

However I must take issue with the recommendation of Knorr beef bullion. Ingredients: Salt, Monosodium Glutamate, Beef Fat, Partially Hydrogenated Cottonseed Oil, Yeast Extract, Caramel Color, Dehydrated Beef Stock, Dehydrated Vegetables (Onion, Carrots, Parsley), Turmeric, Disodium Inosinate and Guanylate, Spices.

Monosodium glutamate should be avoided if you care about your nervous system. Partially hydrogenated anything is no good. "Yeast extract" is just a food industry trick for including more monosodium glutamate.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excitotoxicity>

There are healthful choices for beef bullion, so pick one of the alternatives.

Otherwise, bon appetit. :)

</comment><comment><USER19> Has anyone considered taking a day job that essentially involves loads of free time and no intellectual property constraints? Perhaps some sort of support or attendant role where your primary duty is to monitor and occasionally deal with incidents.

Assuming such a job existed (I have to believe it does), would this have most of the benefits of ramen profitability?

<comment><USER20> Night security guard at an office building.

EDIT: I haven't done this, though I did a lot of standing guard in the middle of the night overseas in the Navy, and you've got _lots_ of time and solitude.

<comment><USER21> I had a friend who did this, with a goal not of starting a business, but of reading a ton of literature and philosophy. He ended up just being tired all the time.

<comment><USER20> It probably really depends on the person...I'm a natural night owl, so once I adjusted to the schedule, it wasn't a big deal. I got a _ton_ of reading and school done during the six months I had that assignment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's interesting to see highly skilled people with enough business-sense to launch a startup, gathered around here embracing poverty.

At the risk of going against the tide, I say there is nothing wrong with consulting on the side, perhaps customizing your product for a big-enough client and making some fuck-off money on the side. Let's think of it, many startups could actually benefit from brushing against a more established business at a B2B level, they might even find a better market, not to mention a better product idea, than their current social web-app that still lacks the necessary "network effect" to pay for itself.

</comment><comment><USER23> "If you want to save money, buy beans in giant cans from discount stores."

We much prefer to soak dry beans, which seem to be much less expensive per unit of protein. Black eye peas have a particularly good nutritional profile, although they usually need added ingredients to have an appealing taste.

<comment><USER9> Hmm, yes. I was never able to do this consistently, even at my poorest. I think the reason is that it requires you to decide in advance what you're going to eat.

<comment><USER24> Needing to soak the beans is an artifact of cooking on wood burning stoves. The water breaks down the beans before you cook, which is advantageous if your stove isn't that hot, or you're burning something expensive, like wood.

If you have a gas stove or a decently powerful electric, you can just dump the dry beans in the pot and start boiling. Cover the pot and boil for about an hour, and then uncover the pot and continue boiling for about another hour to let thicken (YMMV).

<comment><USER25> Why would you need a "decently powerful electric"? It's not getting hotter than the boiling point no matter how many BTUs you throw at it. You're right that an increased cooking time is a bigger concern if you have to chop down the wood, but you should be able to do it just fine on anything that can bring a sufficient quantity of water to a boil.

<comment><USER26> True: you just have to put the beans in quickly enough before you get to a boil.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> There's another beneficial aspect to not smelling of desperation beyond avoiding being taken advantage of: projecting an "I don't need you" aura is actually attractive -- occasionally maddeningly so. This also applies in dating and job hunting.

</comment><comment><USER21> Another reason why ramen profitability is important: when you're working on investment, and your revenues don't meet your expenses, you slowly (or quickly) watch your bank account progress to $0. That is really distracting, and occupies your attention when you should be paying attention to your product.

My solution after experiencing something like this was to turn to consulting. Which, as pg says, is a blessing and a curse - it removes the distraction of the shortening runway, but it adds the distraction of getting paid good money for something other than your startup.

</comment><comment><USER28> _Is there a downside to ramen profitability? Probably the biggest danger is that it might turn you into a consulting firm._

I've seen this happen a few times to friends of mine, it even happened to my first startup. We had a great idea, we developed the service, but we never got around to selling it properly, after having invested so much time and effort into it, and having fixed costs that we had to pay for (office, internet, etc), we started doing custom software development for some clients and ended up doing only that in the end. I finally quit the company. The company still exists and it does pretty well, although there's only one of the original founders left, it is a software consulting company, and it will never be what we set out to do in the first place.

<comment><USER29> From my Amazon review of "More Joel on Software":

Anyone even considering working on shrink-wrap software, especially in a small company, should read this book. (Anyone considering consultingware should especially read the last chapter; it will convince you not to, unless you are a masochist.)

The chapter mentioned is available at [http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/SetYourPriorities.htm...](http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/SetYourPriorities.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> There's not much new here, aside from pg's (secret?) rice-and-beans recipe and a few corrected misunderstandings from earlier essays. Of course, when you say something once and concisely, everyone misunderstands you and you need to repeat yourself, so don't take this comment as criticism or blame. I just think a careful reading of some of pg's earlier essays yields most of the same information.

But there's one point in here I'm not sure is factual:

"He believes it's a good form of discipline to get people to pay you from the beginning. I think that's too constraining. Facebook didn't, and they've done better than most startups."

I got into Facebook relatively late in the college-students-only era, but even then they were playing with alternate revenue models that didn't work out. In particular, they sold "fliers"--you could write up a little ad flier for your university and pay Facebook some small fee to show it on your university's Facebook for awhile. Now they've gone to traditional old boring web advertising to a greater degree than ever before.

</comment><comment><USER30> Someone should make a ramen-profitable cookbook. I'd buy it.

<comment><USER31> I was definitely surprised to see so many comments on here about recipes, when the recipe was a pretty tiny portion of the article! Maybe it reveals a latent demand for recipes specifically aimed at being as cheap as possible.

<comment><USER32> Personally I'd love to see more recipes that are \- cheap \- quick to cook \- healthy \- tasty

As it is, there's a hell of a lot of books that presume you want to make something fancy.

<comment><USER33> There are quite a few student cookbooks over here, and surprisingly most of the stuff in them is fairly decent.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Is there any chance we could expand the conversation beyond "a couple 25 year old founders who can live on practically nothing"?

I'd like to shake the sense that having a wife and kids and a mortgage precludes participation in a minimal profitability trajectory.

<comment><USER35> Well it all depends on the wife/husband. If s/he is earning, and agrees to give you a runway (say 3 years of you not having to pull your financial weight), you essentially get 3 years in which to get to a higher level of profitability. Of course, this all depends on your spouse's career and willingness to enter this, but I know of many marriages that have gone through intertemporal sharing of financial responsibilities.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> "Another thing ramen profitability doesn't imply is Joe Kraus's idea that you should put your business model in beta when you put your product in beta. He believes it's a good form of discipline to get people to pay you from the beginning. I think that's too constraining."

This is one of the best and for many startups non-obvious parts from this essay. The business model _is_ the business, the product is almost secondary. If you have a stellar business model and execution you can have mediocre product and still succeed.

The very best product without a viable business model could easily crash.

Especially when you're going ad supported or freemium the business model will need as many iterations and bug fixes as your product. And you need a backup plan in case things do not go the way you planned for in your most negative projections.

</comment><comment><USER37> Couldn't help throwing my family's Armenian rice pilaf recipe into the mix. Any spiced meat/chickpea/falafel atop is fantastic! Lived on it in college.

It's really meant to be cared for, treated much like a risotto.

The Ingredients

1 1/4 Cup Long Grain White Basmati Rice

1/2 Cup Vermicelli Noodle, Chopped (No yolk Kluski European Noodles)

2 1/2 Cup Chicken Stock

2 Tablespoon Clarified Butter

4 Tablespoon Cubed Butter

Salt & Pepper

The How-To

Add 2 Tbsp. clarified butter and the 1/2 cup Vermacelli Noodle to a medium saucepan and put on medium heat.

Continually mix with a wooden spoon until the noodles are a nice brown (a little past golden) - about 5 minutes.

Add the 1 1/4 cup rice and cook and mix for 6 minutes.

Add the 2 1/2 cup chicken broth, 4 Tbsp. butter and 1 tspn. salt.

Mix for about a minute.

Cover and simmer for 15 minutes until broth has been absorbed/evaporated.

Taste.

Not done? Add more broth, 1/4 cup at a time until so.

thanks!

</comment><comment><USER38> I wish more articles would start that way.

"Now that the term "[vague term co-opted by people who don't know what it means]" has become widespread, I ought to explain precisely what the idea entails."

<comment><USER39> These essays are largely intended for start-up people, and the term is common among them to my knowledge. (or at least I use it...)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Paul, your second footnote is a surprising idea with huge consequences. How about you expand it into an essay?

</comment><comment><USER41> If you can have the discipline to rinse and soak, dry beans are usually cheaper and tastier than canned. (And lentils don't need to soak at all)

</comment><comment><USER42> This is a great article that highlights one of the key changes of our times : every day it becomes easier for a new software business to survive and surviving changes the game. I think about the surfing metaphor I have heard VCs use and imagine the ramen profitable company as a surfer who can paddle out to more big waves or the poker player grinding out small pots waiting for an opportunity at a big win. I think information technology is spurring a fundamental cultural change and that just being able to survive with a good infrastructure will lay so many opportunities in front of us in the years to come.

</comment><comment><USER43> Still advocating the bouillon cubes?

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=526850>

</comment><comment><USER44> My friends came up with a 5 level model for levels of success for a hobby (photography) we had Ramen at level 3 - [http://photoatomica.com/2007/10/16/the-five-levels-of- financ...](http://photoatomica.com/2007/10/16/the-five-levels-of-financial- success-for-a-photographer/)

</comment><comment><USER45> Minor spelling point:

"You may even be able to avoid having _the the_ round occupy your thoughts, if you don't care whether it closes."

</comment><comment><USER46> Definately one of my favourite essays. I am sure I wasn't the only one who got hungry reading the recipe at the end !

</comment><comment><USER47> Damn, now what am I going to do with all this ramen I bought?

<comment><USER27> Ditch the seasoning packets, stir fry with garlic, vegies and spices =)

<comment><USER48> mix in an egg and kale, and it is close to healthy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> _"What keeps people from starting startups is fear"._

Fear due to lack of knowledge about how to start a business. Last I checked, this isn't something they teach in school. MIT and Stanford should have (undergrad) courses on founding startups that covers all the major steps. Students can make rational choices once they have the facts.

</comment><comment><USER50> So, basically, try and make $1000 first and then aim for 1 million. Why not go for 1 million str8 away?

<comment><USER17> So you don't have to borrow $1000 from a guy who will take $950,000 of the million later.

<comment><USER50> Yeah I see that and I agree with much of what pg had to say. Sometimes however it might be better to just shoot str8 for 1 million. He used the facebook example and I do not think that was profitable at all before it gained traction.

I can see scenarios where the start up is making profit, say $100, but needs a lot of investment to move forward, or of course it can go slowly and take 10 years.

I guess what I am trying to say is that from the essay you get the impression that you should not think about raising money at all before it hits the $3k target, when sometimes perhaps you should.

<comment><USER51> The majority of your grammar and spelling is nice, but I have to ask: why did you have to throw in "str8" in both this post and the original?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Stochastic Terrorism: Trump's Role in Inspiring Mass Shootings - <AUTHOR> https://theintercept.com/2019/08/04/el-paso-dayton-mass-shootings-donald-trump/ <comment><USER2> I could point to the anti-police rhetoric and victimization of minorities that the left uses as something that the left does that leads to violence (riots or gang violence).

Ultimately, blaming political rhetoric for the attacks of those who are mentally ill or anti-social is either ignorant or straight up dishonest.

This obsession to learn the political affiliations of people who are clearly mentally ill is frankly ridiculous, and giving attention to these folks deranged "manifesto" has much more directly encouraged these events than any political rhetoric.

The reason they write a manifesto before they murder people is because they want to be heard. When you attempt to use them as a political tool, are you really condemning them, or are you actively rewarding them?

<comment><USER3> It's so plainly exploiting massacre as a partisan tool.

The Dayton Ohio shooter, STEM school shooter, and Congressional baseball shooter were all active left-wing activists but there is no equivalent examination and hand-wringing in the media. The activity is clearly unnecessary and just fuels more indignation and division.</comment></comment>


Facebook News Feed, A Skittish Gift Horse - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/03/no-sir-i-dont-like-it/

<comment><USER2> The feed has just turned into absolute noise for me these days. Wish there was an easier... Ad free way for them to make money.

</comment><comment><USER3> Possible business models for a service: 1\. Free with ads 2\. Freemium a la ADN 3\. Free without ads (Tent, IRC)

What looks nicest to the consumer?</comment>


Factor 0.97 now available - <AUTHOR> http://re-factor.blogspot.com/2014/11/factor-097-now-available.html

<comment><USER2> I'm glad to see that Factor is regaining some momentum. It made such good progress early on that it would be a shame if development didn't continue.

</comment><comment><USER3> Will we ever see a humane J-language binding? I would like to use it Factor- like.

Congrats for the release.

</comment><comment><USER4> always been interested in learning a stack based language, but have been unsure about what sort of programs are interesting to build with this.

<comment><USER5> Factor is general-purpose and you can write most anything you want at this point.

Here's tar in Factor:

[https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/extra/tar/...](https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/extra/tar/tar.factor)

For untarring the linux kernel, Factor tar beats /usr/bin/tar on my Mac by 1s, but 30s vs 6s on Linux for some reason. Could be SSD vs spinning disk, or worse i/o code on Linux. Funnily, there are about 10 files that differ in case only, and Mac file system is case-insensitive by default, so you can't even untar the linux kernel correctly.

Here's host using the dns client library:

[https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/extra/tool...](https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/extra/tools/dns/dns.factor)

[https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/extra/dns/...](https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/extra/dns/dns.factor)

I wrote it because gethostbyname is blocking and Factor has nonblocking i/o for everything else.

There's a cross-platform disk usage tool that outputs the same stuff as df but works on Windows too:

[https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/basis/tool...](https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/basis/tools/files/files.factor)

        USE: tools.files file-systems.

There's a high-level library for doing whatever you want with unix users/groups:

[https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/basis/unix...](https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/basis/unix/users/users- tests.factor)

        effective-user-name [ ] with-effective-user
        effective-user-id [ ] with-effective-user
        all-users

[https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/basis/unix...](https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/basis/unix/groups/groups- tests.factor)

        effective-group-name [ ] with-effective-group
        effective-group-id [ ] with-effective-group
        all-groups

Graphics demo--raytraced spheres using GLSL on a checkerboard pattern, spheres each play their own music:

[https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/tree/master/extra/gpu/...](https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/tree/master/extra/gpu/demos/raytrace)

[https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/extra/gpu/...](https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/blob/master/extra/gpu/demos/raytrace/raytrace.factor)

The main file that sets up the world and loads the shaders and sound is 130 lines and reuses the game library.

</comment></comment><comment> aaron-lebo 5 or 6 years ago the language got a good amount of hype and was progressing rapidly. It's been a long time since 0.96. Why has there been such a long delay?

(not a criticism, just a question)

<comment><USER6> Factor has always been developed by a relatively small team, which makes their achievements even more remarkable. The language's creator, Slava Pestov, was a very important driving force in its development until around 2011, when he stepped down from leading the project to focus on a new job at Google.

John Benediktsson has been leading the project since then, and as the post mentions, there are and have been many other contributors, but I think it's fair to say that the project lost a lot of momentum when Slava stepped down.

Joe Groff, who was another important early contributor, and who is now part of the Swift team at Apple, gave a talk that included an interesting critical retrospective on the factor project (or at least one chapter of it). I'm sure there was a better formatted version of it at some point, but this is all I could find:

[https://github.com/jckarter/zissou/blob/master/talk- notes.tx...](https://github.com/jckarter/zissou/blob/master/talk-notes.txt)

See "bad parts" for the criticisms.

Incidentally, these notes were the first place that I learned of the Julia language.

<comment><USER7> As can be seen from his Github account, he also seems to have been the primary developer on the Clay programming language.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Factor seems to be the only modern[1], mature, actively developed concatenative language right now. But I'm not really a concatenator so I can't tell for sure.

[1] Though maybe some Forths can be considered modern.

<comment><USER8> Kitten is an exciting, actively developed, statically typed concatenative lang: [http://kittenlang.org/](http://kittenlang.org/)

<comment><USER9> Is it somehow related to Cat language ([http://www.cat- language.com/](http://www.cat-language.com/))?

<comment><USER9> Yup, it is. From the FAQ:

"It's also intended to be a practical successor to Cat, which was the first statically typed concatenative language."</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why to use a static site generator instead of Wordpress - <AUTHOR> http://www.guestlistapp.com/blog/2009/10/21/5-reasons-to-use-a-static-site-generator-instead-of-wordpress.html <comment><USER3> Why NOT to use a static site generator instead of Wordpress:

\- You can't update your blog unless you have a computer with the right toolchain available. That includes uploading a cute photo from your smartphone.

\- You can't do delayed posts.

\- You can't have local comments (you can have disqus or similar, but then comments aren't part of your page, and won't show up in searches). Pingbacks won't work.

\- You probably don't need fast. Wordpress + WPcache is really fast.

If your static site does any of this, it's not static, it's a dynamic site that uses the filesystem rather than a DB for storage -- which might very well be clever, but that's not what's being argued.

<comment><USER4> Um.. Why cant the blog be static and have a dynamic webapp hanging off /admin/ which operates as a static site generator? The only difference would be that a program on the web server creates the static files and copies them to the correct directories, instead of a local program creating the static files and copying them to the correct directories.

Edit: I should clarify that I am refering to programs that create static html files. I read the story as dynamic == generates html from some other stored format, be it database or flat files in rst.

<comment><USER3> One of the reasons listed was better security by having _no_ code executed on the server. That argument falls apart if you're willing to have some code running.

<comment><USER5> The webserver and OS are not code?

Oh, you mean world-accessible PHP scripts. That's easy to fix by letting your webserver handle authentication to /admin.

<comment><USER3> Code that has write-permission to anything fancy.

I'm in pedantic territory here, I don't particularly mind the idea of generating static files. My personal opinion is that having a dynamic frontend with fast caching for the most popular views is a better solution for that vast majority of CMS/blog (ie: dynamic) sites out there.

What I do mind, are "I use semi-obscure technology X, here's why X is better than established, proven and hugely popular technology Y in every conceivable way" style ego-boosting articles. I'd rather read a show and tell about how this technology solved a real-life problem for you. I also enjoy the honesty of acknowledging the shortcomings.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Jeff Atwood uses Movable Type for the same reason: it can pump out static HTML. This makes a lot of sense, get rid of the moving parts, and your site will be faster. It's also nice to have be able use your own text editor. Its great to have it under source control also!

Here's an idea: You could use this in conjunction with Dropbox and a custom workflow to automatically update your blog from the road without access to your home machine (I'm think OS X folder actions would work well here)

Related Coding Horror post:<http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001291.html>

<comment><USER7> You will see more things like this happening in the future. My site, <http://ourdoings.com/> already lets you use dropbox to upload photos. It automatically makes a skeleton blog backdated by the date the photos were taken, so you can just throw all your photos into a dropbox folder, and when you have connectivity they get uploaded and organized. A guy just told me the other day he wished he'd had this during his 5.5+-year sailing trip. <http://ourdoings.com/sailingtripphotos/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is exactly what I use for <http://danieltenner.com> (well, almost - I use Webby, not Jekyll). In fact, I've made the source code for that available here, if anyone's interested:

<http://github.com/swombat/danieltenner.com>

Deploying like this has another advantage: you can deploy to a subdirectory of an existing app. The benefit of that is simple: pagerank transfers better from mysite.com/blog to mysite.com (since they are considered to be the same site) than from blog.mysite.com to mysite.com (since they are considered to be two different sites).

Edit: I should add that there is one disadvantage to this approach. If you have non-technical members on your team, and you want to encourage them to blog as well, making them learn to use Textile formatting and command line tools is not a great encouragement.

<comment><USER9> Kudos on having the best interface for reading I have ever seen on a blog. Yours is the only website I've ever seen that Readability makes less readable.

<comment><USER8> Hehe, thanks :-)

That was one of my tests actually, to know when the design was right - <USER2> Readability makes it better, then it still needs improvement!

Of course, that hasn't stopped some people complaining about the font size... you can't please everybody I guess :-P

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I also do this, with a custom python script. Yeah, there are disadvantages, but right now I love its simplicity. I don't have to worry about keeping Wordpress updated; I just make a new static file and run the update script.

If my needs ever change (needing more than static files provide), I'll probably put in a simple Python web server, but still use the static files to edit my content. Eh, we'll see. What I have now works, and I like it -- and that's all that's important.

EDIT: In other words, the best part about a static site isn't that you don't need a web server to grab the content. It's that you have all of your blog posts, right there, in plaintext format. They're tangible and easily migratable into any future format.

When the time comes to have dynamic comments, timed posts, and other features like that, you can write a tiny Python/Ruby web server that generates HTML for you to handle some of the simpler tasks. BUT:

If you have Wordpress-like requirements, use Wordpress.

If you don't, a static blog can be a real joy to work with.

If you want a couple small niceties that a static blog can't have (delayed posts, etc), shove a quick homemade webserver in front.

And in either of those cases, if you are doing more work than you wanted, switch to an easier option. Making a static blog can sometimes be an easy, low-mental-energy hobby project to work on, even if you reinvent the wheel just a little.

<comment><USER11> I'm also using a custom Python script to generate my blog (<http://journal.uggedal.com>). It can be found here: <http://github.com/uggedal/reprise>

Delayed posts:

        at now + 1day yourstaticgenerator.py

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Isn't this obvious? We have a really good toolchain for dealing with filesystems. The toolchain for dealing with content in databases is not nearly as good. As a result static content should be kept in the filesystem, even if you have to play tricks to do it.

The use case for web pages created dynamically out of the database is user generated content. There our existing toolchain doesn't matter because users don't get access to your filesystem so you have to create new tools anyways. And a database makes it easier to keep data structured, takes care of transactional mechanics, and has good tools for things like failing over in event of a machine crash.

Seriously we had a build/compilation step as part of deployment back in the first website I ever worked on. We didn't use a CMS to do it though, we used a homegrown templating system (later changed to Template Toolkit) and a Makefile.

</comment><comment><USER13> There is a Firefox plugin called "It's all Text!" that puts a little edit button at the bottom of every multiline text widget. This button fires up your favorite text editor, and when you save it writes the text back into that text widget.

<comment><USER14> I replied to another post with this before finding yours.

One thing we programmers ought to recognize is that it really is all text. From the moment we type on our keyboard to the time it's viewed in the reader's browser. If we separate our presentation layer (like HTML rendering) from our content layer (the actual text with some annotations for things like headers), we are free to edit the content as we see fit and then we can port it into any presentation layer, from a text editor to a blog.

Also, you could always just edit in your favorite editor and then copy and paste, no? Or write a script to take a bunch of flat files and inject them into your database.

<comment><USER13> Copy and paste isn't that reliable, I've had lots of little annoyances with line breaks and other formatting issues.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Tom's post on Jekyll - [http://tom.preston-werner.com/2008/11/17/blogging- like-a-hac...](http://tom.preston-werner.com/2008/11/17/blogging-like-a- hacker.html)

Maciej wrote about this recently - [http://idlewords.com/2009/09/using_wordpress_to_generate_fla...](http://idlewords.com/2009/09/using_wordpress_to_generate_flat_files.htm)

</comment><comment><USER16> With the addition of a plugin or two and a sane Apache configuration, Wordpress can handle some pretty extreme loads. This is not to say that it's perfect, but rather that performance doesn't have to be a concern if you know what you're doing.

To me the biggest selling point for Wordpress is it's flexibility. I'm willing to take a performance hit for that.

</comment><comment><USER17> I was hoping that this would direct to a could not connect to database page.

</comment><comment><USER18> It's a neat way of working - but it does leave you with limited functionality.

I've gone entirely the other way - my blog is <http://andrewducker.livejournal.com> \- everything is database driven and there's no static content at all.

Which, I'm sure, is slower - but it also makes updates to the layout (for instance) faster, as you're not having to regenerate the entire site. Plus, of course, you get huge wodges of functionality, like the commenting system (which is the best I've seen anywwhere).

<comment><USER19> LiveJournal's hardly a fair counterpoint -- it's a massive site with a complex, highly-tuned architecture, designed to be as fast as a dynamic, database-backed site can be:

[http://www.slideshare.net/vishnu/livejournals-backend-a- hist...](http://www.slideshare.net/vishnu/livejournals-backend-a-history-of- scaling)

Most people who install Wordpress are doing it on a modest shared server or VPS. The point of the article is the benefits of baking and serving static files for these folks are greater than the potential risks of having a single Apache + mod_php + MySQL instance keel over under heavy load.

<comment><USER18> That was kinda my point. The middle ground doesn't hold much benefit (as far as I can see) - you have to manage the complexity yourself and it's risky. I'd either want a simple system that's not goint to blow up on me (i.e. static files) or I want a fully functional system that's run by someone else (i.e. livejournal).

<comment><USER20> I recently migrated my WP.org blog to WP.com because of this. Now I feel safe.

Nevertheless, I publish my personal site using Emacs' Org-mode and if I were to start a blog from scratch I would use something like org-mode or jekyll.

Probably because I need the feeling of being in control of my data.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I hate to tell you, but you can have some of the best of both worlds, as other commenters have pointed out: WP SuperCache (see <http://ocaoimh.ie/wp-super- cache/> ) serves static pages. Unless you update 20+ times per day, it probably doesn't matter that the site takes a minute to rebuild after posting.

</comment><comment><USER20> Does anybody know how to export WP posts to plain text files? Maybe a script that reads the export.xml file.

<comment><USER22> IIRC Jekyll has a WordPres importer, which I presume does something similar.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> This is an excellent idea--no program other than basic web server talks to the internet--just static files.

<comment><USER24> I've thought an idea like this could be used for more than just a blog (and maybe it is in certain cases). Rather than pulling up the pages every time, have a build process merge content and a template to form HTML pages. It could be used on sites that are potentially huge, but render an ultra-fast site with thousands of pages.

The only trick is to integrate that with comment forms and the like. But even that isn't too hard to code around.

<comment><USER25> I'm currently making a dynamic rewrite of a legacy CMS written to generate static files. The static CMS is a huge PITA. Yeah you can slip dynamic features in there 'just' where you need them. What you wind up with is a mess, and once your site gets a lot of content you start generating a LOT of files. Our rebuild process can take a couple hours, and while it does that it's pegging the disk.

There's nothing wrong with static sites, for something like a blog it's OK. The feature set is fairly limited. But once you do want to add dynamic stuff, it can get tricky. I'd say for most projects starting with a static generator is a mistake because unless you know for sure the requirements won't change you can easily paint yourself into a corner.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Also see tools like R3 - <http://developer.yahoo.com/r3/>

</comment><comment><USER27> I'll throw in my two cents: 99% of the blogs change no more than once a day. What is the point of needless complexity, databases, settings, etc. I like simple, single script that rewrites my content for the web since I still have my content on disk. I can easily grep for content.

Disclaimer: I have a static generated blog.

</comment><comment><USER28> I would be interested to see a follow up post after the honeymoon phase ends. I switched from WP to webby, loved it at first, but will be reverting soon. Static is faster, but php is fast enough for most blogs, and WP is full featured.

<comment><AUTHOR> We have been using it for about 3ish months now and have not run into any issues. It is conceivable that the blog would eventually move over to a real CMS (not wordpress) once we have a need for dynamic content, but the website will stay static for the foreseeable future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I used to use Blogger this way - you would give them your FTP info and it would publish static files.

Worked fine, I just didn't really like using Blogger.

</comment><comment><USER30> Anybody remember City Desk? I loved it <http://www.fogcreek.com/CityDesk/>

</comment><comment><USER31> pyblosxom can run dynamically or be used as a static renderer. The same input files are used for both so you can start with static rendered content uploaded to your web server, and then easily migrate to running dynamically. I use it both ways, works good.

</comment><comment><USER32> ikiwiki (<http://ikiwiki.info/>) as static site generator looks cool to me.

</comment><comment><USER33> bytepawn.com and blog.scalien.com are also generated by bash scripts.

</comment><comment><USER34> The real problem here is PHP/MySQL, not the dynamicism per se.

A blogging platform based on Rhino (EcmaScript) on JVM hosted on virtualized server (or in cloud) would easily resist slashdot effect.

And using file-based storage it would be storage-friendly, too.

And nobody prevents you from using external editor for WordPress, even.

<comment><USER5> File-based storage may be "storage-friendly", but it isn't retrieval-friendly. For example, finding the list of all tags your blog uses requires a linear scan over every document in the system. Not fast. (Visit <http://blog.jrock.us/>. It does this. It takes a long time to load.)

<comment><USER34> You can cache cache that in-memory! Because you've got a persistent app server.

<comment><USER5> How do you know when to invalidate the cache without doing a scan over all the files?

(Answer: hope your filesystem updates the directory change time when a file inside changes, or that your app server is inotify-ed of the change. Both are more complicated than querying a database.

If I used KiokuDB for Angerwhale, it would only take me one key lookup for things that currently involve traversing the directory tree. Caching is nice, but it is not the solution to all problems.)

<comment><USER34> You know when you update your data. Therefore, you invalidate your cache when you update your data.

Timestamps help alot if you're paranoid, also.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>