The recent launch of Color (and its massive $41M funding round) received quite a bit of backlash from the tech community. I had some harsh commentary for the app as well. When a product rolls out guns blazing with funding, it’s ripe for scrutiny – and plenty of people gave it out. The app lacks design, some functionality and when compared to other photo sharing applications, offers less to the user. Some told me to stop “hating” on the app, but it’s really not about the app at all. This is about what message funding this type of product (again and again and again) sends to the tech ecosystem. It bothers me that young entrepreneurs see this funding round and aspire to create the “NEXT BIG PHOTO SHARING APP” that takes over the Valley. These aspirations are depressingly low. Where are all the entrpreneurs trying to compete with Google over self-driving cars? How about competing with SunRun’s solar energy systems to power homes across the country? We need to stop encouraging thinking small and give financial backing and media attention to those who choose to aim higher and think bigger. We don’t need another photo sharing app.
Edit: Color has an All Star Team and many have noted that these applications likely have much more up their sleeves than just photo sharing. I completely agree – they wouldn’t have received that amount of funding otherwise – but the large majority of photo sharing apps have not proven themselves to be more than just that so far. Color’s marketing strategy has not emphasized the additional technology that might be under the hood or what’s coming in future updates. To consumers – it’s purely a photo sharing app at the moment.
Evan C
Just like we didn’t need another search engine?
Mar 25, 2011 @ 2:00 am
Cristina Cordova
There were clear faults to existing search engines pre-google (and there are problems now with content farms). It was and still is a high level challenge – unlike making a photo sharing app. I would expect the drive to solve hard problems from seasoned entrepreneurs like those involved with Color. Color is likely more than just a photo sharing app – it just hasn’t been marketed any other way yet.
Mar 25, 2011 @ 2:20 am
ANC
Excellent point, thank you! Investors and entrepreneurs are always going to go where the money is, but your broader point is well-taken: entrepreneurs need to be encouraged to aim higher and tackle bigger problems.
Mar 25, 2011 @ 2:28 am
gaurav
My thoughts exactly. Facebook, Flickr have already solved the photo sharing problem for 99% of people. And I don’t know for how many ppl photo sharing is such a huge problem that needs these multiple solutions. Please work on something more deserving of your credentials.
Mar 25, 2011 @ 3:22 am
Reggie
Couldnt agree more. Where the hell are my flying cars?!
Mar 25, 2011 @ 3:22 am
Joshua
I kind of feel the same way but also see the search engine question. It’s not perfect yet. I feel the better line could be
Stop funding photosharing apps. Stop covering them. Stop showering them with love. People are going to keep building them but we can turn our attention to the bigger problems.
Mar 25, 2011 @ 4:01 am
Michael Tchong
Cristina, I agree with you and have been trying to get Silicon Valley to become far more creative in their funding strategies, we need so many different challenges tackled, like drag-and-drop IT, etc., social CRM, etc.
I’m organizing an innovation crusade and would love to have you involved. Will ping you in the near future.
Keep evangelizing,
Michael
Mar 25, 2011 @ 3:45 pm
Nelson
Pretty insane amount of funding, but I think the app is pretty cool after playing around with it.
Mar 28, 2011 @ 3:39 pm
Sebastian
If I got this even halfway right, Color is not so much a photo sharing app, as it is a situation sharing app.
Mar 30, 2011 @ 1:23 am
Chris Hulls
Good post – I agree that the Color team should be congratulated! The concern is the signal this sends that photo sharing related start-ups are where effort and money should be spent (at the potential expense of other companies and ideas trying to get off the ground)…
Mar 31, 2011 @ 6:40 am