Successful web applications

I have a little theory I have been working on, it is probably dead obvious to some people, but it only crystalised in my head relatively recently. I have had a few ideas in my time (so far none have made it to the real world), and in mentally stepping through these ideas I have started to refine my methods of evaluating an idea. One of the mental tests I have been using recently is:

Does this idea:

1. Help some business/cross section of people do what they do, more efficiently/economically?
2. Would the technology associated to my idea help me act more efficiently in an environment of competition?
3. Or, does this idea earn me income by facilitating other people earning income

So, Point 1 and point 3 interact in an interesting way, since helping people operate more efficiently/economically in their business, I am effectively providing a service which facilitates other people earning income. There is a subtle difference, but I guess point 1 could be considered a further classification of point 3.

Basically, for me, the pencil test of an idea, deciding on its value and functionality, is "Does this make other people money", and that is the difference that social applications have brought to the table. Generally the oft touted value in a web app is "create eyeballs, and sell advertising", and it is valid, but it is not the only golden egg. Facebook has pretty much gotten the lion-share of eyeballs in recent time, and they have a powerful and subtle distinction over other eyeball generators: targeted advertising. If you look over the questions you answer on your profile it reads just like (but, is disguised well enough not to seem like) the kind of thing you see on marketing surveys. They offer a fantastic platform to advertisers: you can choose your segment _exactly_, pay per advert, etc. etc. Either way, facebook is successful on two fronts, it helps people be more efficient in their social networking (i.e. something they do normally), and provides a platform for companies to advertise efficiently (lets not get into effectiveness). So, they win on point 1, and they win on point 3. They also perform well on point 2, because they used technology well to achieve better efficiency in a competitive market.

But I didn't come here to praise just the facebook, I was only trying to illustrate my point. So, how well do the ideas floating round your head fit into my picture? If you hypothetically test your idea, does it honestly do well against those criteria? And, if it doesn't could you modify your idea to fit into that framework?

I think too many web applications are hyped up (the hype curve, duh), and brush over these things. There are lots of apps floating around which I know I will try out, say "neat" and never use again, because they don't help me be more efficient or help me make money (not to say that said app may not be good for other people).

The other further classification is "does this make it harder, or easier for someone to do said task" and that must take into account factors like bandwidth, computer availability etc. Good ideas meld into our lifestyles. A good example is 3D, interactive displays, they are a cute concept, and wow the audience on the bourne identity, but they are unrealistic until certain things happen that make them _easier_ to use than our current interactions with the tech around us. Its for that reason that people bleat about the iPhone not having a keyboard, because, well, the keyboard is a banging idea (still), and quite hard to beat.

A recent example of this was the new South African foray into cellphone based money transactions called "wiWallet". Their site claims it is "payment simplified". They are trying to crack the nut that people have been trying to crack for ages...turning your cellphone into a "wallet". But IMHO they have fared poorly. I personally have moved from using cash to using my credit card for everything, so I could get away with sticky taping my CC onto the back of my phone, and have a better opportunity of being able to pay almost anywhere. The idea of coding your CC onto your phone removes that physical token, but doesn't seem to add much value beyond the romantic idea of not having to carry a CC around. So your target market is now: People who have credit cards, and are willing to pay more money per month, for the chance that they will be able to pay for something without carrying their wallet (if their vendor has a machine which can do it). If they removed the need for having a credit card (like taking the money out of your airtime, etc.) then they would be moving into an interesting territory. Since I have to carry my driver's license (because I drive most of the places I am going to shop), carrying my credit card does not cost me anything extra. wiWallet does not make it more efficient for me to make a payment, it does facilitate making people money, but it doesn't improve on the model the credit card already provides. To me it feels like a hi-tech solution for a low-tech problem. Just my 2c.

Also, for real, genuine success, in the words of J.D. Hitchcock "Make your (website|application) awesome".

Bookmark/Search this post with: