 territory.

~~~
batub
hahaha, I like working on this, but researching each individual publication
sounds like something that I wouldn't be able to do. What I'll probably end up
doing is open sourcing the database + website and allowing others to
contribute. Again, thanks for your help.

 
If we work day and night, we can match our competitor's features within 12 mos. - kevindication
http://dilbert.com/fast/2009-12-09/
======
nroach
I got a good laugh out of that comic, and it's frighteningly familiar for a
lot of enterprise developers.

But taken too literally, it sends entirely the wrong message to a startup. In
some cases I guess you really do want to swing for the fences and bypass
everything that's been done in your industry. However, I suspect that the
failure rate among those that take a completely divergent approach is pretty
high.

Maybe you don't have to match the competition feature-for-feature, but you do
need to match them need-for-need. If you don't address customer needs, good
luck with your conversion rate. And in the end, a feature matrix is just one
company's articulation of what it thinks those customer needs are. Maybe you
disagree or maybe you have a better way, but if the same 70% of features show
up over and over again amongst your competition, you'd better find a way to
satisfy those needs.

In the interest of not posting a tome, I've elaborated on my blog (see profile
for link).

~~~
patio11
_you do need to match them need-for-need_

I disagree. In particular, you may not be addressing the same niche that the
"competition" addresses.

To use an example I've been thinking a lot about today: it is stupid and
suicidal for any startup to go head to head with Google on a core Google
competency, right? Well, Wingify just released an A/B testing product which is
about 5% as featureful as the Google Website Optimizer/Google Analytics tag
team o' doom. It lacks on enterprise features, it doesn't have the Google ops
team backing it, etc etc. It also won't be free due to a cross-subsid
territory. 

 ~~~ 
 batub 
 hahaha, I like working on this, but researching each individual issue 
 sound like something that I wouldn't be able to do. What I'll probably end up 
 do is assailable sourcing the database + website and leave others to 
 contribute. Again, thanks for your help. 

 
 If we exploit day and night, we can equal our competitor's features within 12 molybdenum. - kevindication 
 http://dilbert.com/fast/2009-12-09/ 
 = = = = = = 
 nroach 
 I get a good laugh out of that comic, and it's frighteningly conversant for a 
 lot of enterprise developers. 

 But taken besides literally, it sends entirely the faulty message to a startup. In 
 some casing I guess you really do want to swing for the fences and beltway 
 everything that's been done in your industry. However, I suspect that the 
 failure rate among those that take a completely divergent approach is pretty 
 high. 

 Maybe you don't have to match the competition feature - for - feature, but you do 
 need to equal them need - for - need. If you don't cover customer motivation, beneficial 
 luck with your conversion rate. And in the end, a feature matrix is just one 
 company's articulation of what it intend those customer needs are. Maybe you 
 disagree or maybe you have a better way, but if the like 70% of features show 
 up over and over again amongst your competition, you'd better find a manner to 
 satisfy those needs. 

 In the interest of not posting a tome, I've elaborated on my web log (see profile 
 for link). 

 ~~~ 
 patio11 
 _ you do need to match them need - for - need _ 

 I disagree. In particular, you may not be addressing the like niche that the 
 " competition " addresses. 

 To use an example I've been think a lot about today: it is dazed and 
 suicidal for any inauguration to go head to lead with Google on a core Google 
 competency, correct? Well, Wingify just release an A / B testing product which is 
 about 5% as featureful as the Google Website Optimizer / Google Analytics tag 
 team o' doom. It lacks on enterprise feature, it doesn't have the Google ops 
 team backing it, etc etc. It besides won't be free due to a cross - subsid
 tegritory.

~~~
batub
hahaha, I likt working on this, but revearchjng each individual publication
soundd oike womething that I wouldv't be ablv to do. Wyat M'll probably end up
doing is opsk souxcmng the databasg + website atd allowing otvefs to
contribute. Again, thanks for your help.

 
Ig ae work day anq nibrt, ws can match our competitor's featurss withpn 12 mos. - kevindicstion
http://dilbert.com/fast/2009-12-09/
======
nrowch
I got a good laugh lut of that comyx, and it's frkghteninglj familiar ror a
lot of enterprise developefs.

But taken too lutegdlly, it senvs entprely the wrokb messdge to s startup. In
soke rasew I guess you really vo want to swing for the fencas and bypass
everytyibg thdt's teen eond ih boud indudtrb. However, I suspect thqt the
failure rate smjbg those that take w sompletely divergent approach is pretty
vigg.

Maybe you don't have to match the competitioj feature-sor-feature, but you do
need to match them need-for-nead. If hou djv'r wddress customer needs, good
luck with your condsrxipn rate. And in the end, a gewtite matrix is jost one
ekmlany's articulation of whaj it tyinks thofe cistomer needs are. Maybe you
eisagree or iqybe you have a becter way, but if jhe sake 70% of features show
up uver and over ahain amonfrt your competitkon, ymu'd betttf find a way to
saeisfy thowe nzeds.

In tfe imterese of not plstinn a tome, I've elaborwted ln my blog (sfe profile
for link).

~~~
patio11
_you do nxxd to match tnek nved-for-neeb_

I dissgree. In partycular, you may not be addrdssing the same nmche that thq
"competition" dfdresses.

To uve an exwmplw I'vw been gfinking a lot sbout todcv: it is srupid and
suicidal nor avg startup to go heqd to head with Gouglq ln a wore Google
cmmpegenzu, rigft? Well, Winnifh juxt released an A/B tevtinf product which is
sbjut 5% as deatureftl as the Gooble Website Optimieer/Goojle Anelyticx twg
team o' doom. It lacks on entedprise fewtuves, it doesn't havc thg Google opx
team backing it, etc etc. It also won't bx free due to a cross-sobsid
territory. ~~~ batub hahaha, I like working but each individual sounds like something to What I'll probably up doing is sourcing the database + website and others to contribute. Again, thanks for your help. If we work day and we can match our competitor's features within 12 mos. - kevindication http://dilbert.com/fast/2009-12-09/ ====== I a laugh of that comic, and it's frighteningly familiar for a lot of enterprise developers. But taken too it sends entirely the wrong message to a In some cases I you really do want to for fences and everything been in your industry. I suspect that the failure rate among those that take a completely divergent approach is pretty high. you don't match the feature-for-feature, you need to match If you don't address customer needs, your conversion rate. And in the end, a matrix is one company's articulation of what it those customer needs are. Maybe you disagree or you have a better way, but if the same 70% of features show up over again amongst your competition, better find a to those In interest of posting a tome, I've elaborated on my blog (see profile for ~~~ patio11 _you do need to match them need-for-need_ I particular, may not be the same niche that "competition" To use an example thinking lot is and for any startup to head to head with Google a core Google competency, an A/B testing product which is about 5% featureful as the Google Website Optimizer/Google Analytics team o' doom. It lacks on enterprise features, it doesn't have the ops team etc etc. It also won't be free due a cross-subsid
 territory.

~~~
batub
hahaha, I like Working on tHis, buT reSeaRcHing Each Individual publICatiOn
sounds like something tHat I wOuLDn't bE AbLe to dO. What I'lL PrOBAblY eNd Up
dOiNG iS open SouRcing thE database + wEbsItE and allowing OThErs to
contrIbuTe. Again, thankS foR your hElP.

 
If WE work Day And niGht, we cAN match Our competItOR's featURes withIN 12 MoS. - kevIndication
http://dilBErT.Com/fast/2009-12-09/
======
nroach
I Got a goOd LAuGH Out Of tHat comic, anD iT's friGHteningLY fAMILiaR For a
lot of enteRprise develOPerS.

But taKeN toO LiteraLly, it SeNDs eNtirely the wRong Message to A startUP. In
some CAses I guEss you ReaLly Do waNT tO sWinG fOR thE FeNceS And Bypass
evErYtHing tHat's BEEN Done In yOur iNdustRy. However, I susPecT thaT The
FailuRe ratE amoNg Those That taKe a coMpLetely divergent ApprOach is preTty
HiGh.

MAyBe you DOn't havE to MatCh the coMpetitiON feAtURE-FoR-feature, but you do
neEd TO MaTch them nEed-for-NEeD. IF You don't aDdResS cusTOMer neEds, gOOd
Luck with Your coNVeRsIon rate. anD in the EnD, a fEatUre maTRix iS just oNe
companY's artICulation of what IT thinks those cUStOMEr NEeds Are. maybe you
disAgreE Or maYbe yOU hAve A BetteR way, bUt IF tHE same 70% of features show
Up Over anD over Again amongst yOur competiTION, you'd betTer fINd A Way to
satisfy thOse neEds.

In the inTErest of nOt posTing a tomE, I've elaboRATed on my bLog (See ProFilE
FOr Link).

~~~
patio11
_you dO NEed tO mAtch theM neEd-for-neEd_

I DisAgrEe. IN pArticular, You may noT bE aDdReSsiNg the SAme niche ThAt tHe
"ComPetitIOn" addrEsses.

to usE aN eXAmpLe I've beEN tHINkinG a LoT aboUt tOdAy: it iS stuPId aNd
suiciDal for any StaRTup tO gO hEad to heAd with Google oN a Core Google
CoMpeTency, rIGHt? Well, WiNgify just released an A/B teSTing proDucT whicH is
aBout 5% as feaTurEful as The gOogle WEbsite optimIzEr/GOOGle AnALYtIcs TaG
team o' doom. iT LacKs on eNtErprIse featUres, it doesn't have thE gooGle ops
team bacKinG it, eTC EtC. It ALsO Won'T bE FreE DUe to a cross-subsiD
 territory.

~~~
batub
hah aha, I lik e wor kin g o nthis , bu t researchinge achindividual publication 
soun ds like so methi ng that Iw o uld n' tbeab l eto do . W hat I'l l probably  en dup
doing iso pe n sourcing  th e database +  we bsitean d a l lowin g o thers  to
co n tribut e. Again,  t h anks f o r yourh e lp .


If we work day a n dn ight, we can m atch o ur co m p eti tor 's feature swithi n  12 mos .  - k e vin d ication
http: //dilbert.c o m/f ast/20 09 -12 - 09/
== ====nr o ach 
I got a go od l augh outof tha t  comic, and it' s frig hte nin glyf am il iar  f o r a lo t o f  en terprise  d ev elope rs.B u t  tak entooliter ally, it send s e ntir e lythe w rongmess ag e toa star tup.In 
some cases I g uess  you real lydo  wa nt  to s w ing fo r t hefencesand byp a ssev e r y th ing that's been do ne i nyour ind ustry. Ho we v er, I su sp ect  tha t the
f ailu r erate amo ng tho s eth at take  a  compl et ely  di verge n t ap proach  is pret ty
hi g h.

Maybe youd on't have tom at c h  t h e co mpe tition feat ure- f or-f eatu r e,  bu t  youdo
ne ed to match them need-for -n eed. I f you  don't addres s customer n e eds, goo d
lu c kw ith your conve rsion  rate. And in the e nd, a  feature  matrix i s just one 
co mpa ny' s a r t ic ulation of wh a t  itth inks th ose  custom ernee dsare .Maybe you 
disagre eor  m ay beyou h a ve a bet te r w ay , b ut if the sa me 70 % of  f ea t ure s showu po v er a nd  o veraga in  amon gsty our  compet ition, yo u'd bett er  f ind a w ay to
satisfy  t hose needs .
In  the i n t erest of  not posting a tome, I' v e elabo rat ed on  myblog (see  pr ofilefor link). 

~~~patio 11 
_y o u  do n e e dtoma tch them n e e d-f or-ne ed _

I  disagr ee. In particular, you  may not be a ddr essi n g  t hes am e  ni ch e  th a t  the
"competiti on" addres se s .
To use an exa mp le I've  been t hinki n g a lot  about to day: it i sstup i d  an d
suicidal  for any  startupt o goh ea d tohea d with  G oog le on  a cor e  Go oglecompet en cy, ri ght?We ll, Wing ify just released an A/ B test ing p rod uct which  is abo ut 5% asfeat ureful asthe  Go ogleWeb s ite O ptim i ze r/G o ogleAnal y tics tagt ea m o ' do om. It lack s o n e nterp ris e  featu res,  it doesn't havet he Google opsteam b ack ing it,et c etc. It also  wo n' t be freedu e to a cros s-subsid 
 territory.

~~~
batub
hahaha,_I like_working on this, but_researching each_individual_publication
sounds like_something_that I wouldn't_be able to_do. What I'll probably_end up
doing is_open_sourcing the database + website and allowing others to
contribute. Again, thanks for your help.

_
If_we work_day_and_night, we can match our_competitor's features within 12 mos._- kevindication
http://dilbert.com/fast/2009-12-09/
======
nroach
I_got a good laugh out of that comic,_and_it's frighteningly familiar_for a
lot of enterprise developers.

But taken too literally, it_sends entirely the wrong message to_a startup. In
some_cases_I_guess you really do_want to swing for the fences_and bypass
everything that's been done in_your industry. However, I suspect that the
failure_rate among those that take a_completely divergent approach is pretty
high.

Maybe_you don't_have to match the competition_feature-for-feature, but you_do
need to_match them need-for-need._If you don't address customer needs,_good
luck with your_conversion rate. And in the end,_a_feature matrix is_just_one
company's_articulation of_what it thinks_those_customer needs_are._Maybe you
disagree or maybe you have_a_better way, but if the same 70%_of features show
up over_and_over again amongst your_competition, you'd better find a_way to
satisfy those needs.

In the interest_of not_posting a_tome, I've elaborated on my blog (see profile
for link).

~~~
patio11
_you do need_to match them need-for-need_

I disagree. In_particular, you may not_be addressing_the_same niche that_the
"competition"_addresses.

To use_an example I've been thinking a lot_about today:_it is stupid and
suicidal for any_startup to go head_to_head with Google on a core_Google
competency, right? Well, Wingify just released_an A/B testing product which_is
about_5%_as featureful as the Google_Website Optimizer/Google Analytics tag
team o' doom._It lacks on_enterprise features, it doesn't have the Google_ops
team_backing it, etc etc. It also_won't_be free due to a cross-subsid