I'm rather sick of the internet's armchair critics and non-contributing zeros. Anyone can have any opinion (and unfortunately the internet makes that too easy), few people can actually make a difference.
You'd think all the TC haters could build a thriving blog and community with their vast knowledge and experience of 'failure', but since they can't scale a simple WordPress blog with modest traffic — I'm not hopeful. It's taken over 10 minutes to load the page. Even more ironic, it's a linkbait headline with less than stellar content.
Not sure about the Coding Horror hatred, although a few has implied that whatever gets posted on Coding Horror gets posted here as well, even when the article isn't particularly interesting or good.
I can't speak for everyone here not doing a startup, but for me however, Techcrunch is on average not very interesting, seems more interested in stirring up drama (at least lately) than breaking real stories, and too self-important for me to pay attention to.
I'm not sure why you would think people would need an agenda ;)
I originally thought TC was like a tabloid. Now, after thinking about it, I've come to a conclusion that there's a better analogy: it's like cable news.
The things you see on cable news (e.g., CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc.) are, most of the time, not really "news". They're trumped-up soundbyte stories which are "broken" at times calculated to keep eyeballs on the screen. The information reported is often wrong and corrections are rarely made. Sensationalism and reporting any controversy one can find, no matter how minor, is the order of the day. Popular stories/subjects, when discovered, are turned into repeating segments to milk them for all they're worth.
And, of course, people who rely on cable news outlets for actual news will come away fairly poorly informed on the state of the world.
But all of the above apply equally well to TC. It's just another big American infotainment outlet, working to make money off something-that-maybe-kinda-looks-like-news.
Which is why I don't read TC, and feel frustration with people who (as on this site) obsess about it and constantly link to it. Mentally, I class such people with folks in real life who want to tell me all about the latest thing they heard on Fox News.
Well said. As an example, their latest headline is complaining that the one of the Pre development wikis that was about tethering the Pre was forced to shut down. They are trashing the dev's for not getting involved in a big, ugly legal battle which they will eventually lose.
This has been a standard cat-and-mouse game in the industry for many years. Apple shuts down sites that deal with hackintoshes, MSFT shuts down sites that talk about modding the 360. Nobody likes that kind of crippling of hardware, but its not news. Usually, that development happens anyway, its just moved underground somewhere.
Anyway, the TC folks see some sort of value in reporting that the devs are weak in some way for caving in to big, expensive lawyers. It seems like when its anything involving the Pre, they trash it and the people around it like Hannity does to Obama.
I admit I kind of new to the startup scene, but why is it I hear that getting mentioned on TC is worth it's weight in gold? It looks like a less frequently updated, bad copy of Engadget or Gizmodo than anything else. Not sure if the linked article is accurate or not, but I'm not sure why there is all this love/hate towards TC?
I find WAY more interesting articles and discussions here on HN. Plus the discussions and comments here are hands down better than the 4chan crap on those other sites (TC, Engadget, Gizmodo, etc).
Because a large number of investors and potential clients read Techcrunch, so having your startup mentioned on the site does a lot for your notoriety amongst the business crowd. While Hacker News, Engadget and Gizmodo might be more interesting to us hackers, their audiences expose your company to fewer business prospects.
Drama leads to audience. TC is a master at drama (with product, people, and organization). So, if you want to get an audience, get into Techcrunch. However, I would agree the product has to be good, otherwise, it is just a big spike for nothing.
An audience of other people trying to get an audience, and some random odd techie types that read TC. What I'm saying is, the audience of TC is unlikely to be your target market.
Yeah its the only bad thing I see about HN; it seems like everything t/c says makes it to the front page for some reason. You click on the headline, read the sometimes inflammatory/trollish story, scroll down and see that the author and commenters are usually fighting about something silly. t/c is by no means a site for "hackers" to read..
A good example -- google voice announced months ago (when the site launched) that portability would be coming soon. Somehow Arrington figured it out yesterday and posted a really poor story implying it was some sort of "secret" weapon for Google (and got into the requisite argument with a commenter). That story somehow ends up on the HN front page.
I don't get the HN obsession with TC -- slashdot / reddit / digg and the other nerdy sites seem to ignore it and I wish this site would treat it like what it is as well.
To be fair, I didn't know that google would be offering portability until I read the story on TC. Sure I could follow Google's blog, but I don't. Maybe I'm just really good at ignoring Arrington's drama, but I really appreciate the information I get from TC.
And when a TC story ends up on the HN front page, I enjoy reading HN comments. Because there is no way in hell that I'm going to read the comments directly on the TC article.
My point on why it was a poorly written story was that he implied it was some sort of "secret" which he was breaking. Sure, most people missed the google voice FAQ which talked about this, but don't call it something it was not. Even if it was good, useful information, calling it a "secret" is a bit self-important.
And completely agreed with your point on HN comments for TC stories. That is a nice side-effect.
I was hoping for something a little more self-aware, like: "Spend eighteen hours a day breaking stories that are important to the tech community, and zero hours per day talking back to critics. Admit that your goal is to be the first to report, not the last word," etc.
16 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 40.7 ms ] threadYou'd think all the TC haters could build a thriving blog and community with their vast knowledge and experience of 'failure', but since they can't scale a simple WordPress blog with modest traffic — I'm not hopeful. It's taken over 10 minutes to load the page. Even more ironic, it's a linkbait headline with less than stellar content.
I can't speak for everyone here not doing a startup, but for me however, Techcrunch is on average not very interesting, seems more interested in stirring up drama (at least lately) than breaking real stories, and too self-important for me to pay attention to.
I'm not sure why you would think people would need an agenda ;)
The things you see on cable news (e.g., CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc.) are, most of the time, not really "news". They're trumped-up soundbyte stories which are "broken" at times calculated to keep eyeballs on the screen. The information reported is often wrong and corrections are rarely made. Sensationalism and reporting any controversy one can find, no matter how minor, is the order of the day. Popular stories/subjects, when discovered, are turned into repeating segments to milk them for all they're worth.
And, of course, people who rely on cable news outlets for actual news will come away fairly poorly informed on the state of the world.
But all of the above apply equally well to TC. It's just another big American infotainment outlet, working to make money off something-that-maybe-kinda-looks-like-news.
Which is why I don't read TC, and feel frustration with people who (as on this site) obsess about it and constantly link to it. Mentally, I class such people with folks in real life who want to tell me all about the latest thing they heard on Fox News.
This has been a standard cat-and-mouse game in the industry for many years. Apple shuts down sites that deal with hackintoshes, MSFT shuts down sites that talk about modding the 360. Nobody likes that kind of crippling of hardware, but its not news. Usually, that development happens anyway, its just moved underground somewhere.
Anyway, the TC folks see some sort of value in reporting that the devs are weak in some way for caving in to big, expensive lawyers. It seems like when its anything involving the Pre, they trash it and the people around it like Hannity does to Obama.
I find WAY more interesting articles and discussions here on HN. Plus the discussions and comments here are hands down better than the 4chan crap on those other sites (TC, Engadget, Gizmodo, etc).
An audience of other people trying to get an audience, and some random odd techie types that read TC. What I'm saying is, the audience of TC is unlikely to be your target market.
A good example -- google voice announced months ago (when the site launched) that portability would be coming soon. Somehow Arrington figured it out yesterday and posted a really poor story implying it was some sort of "secret" weapon for Google (and got into the requisite argument with a commenter). That story somehow ends up on the HN front page.
I don't get the HN obsession with TC -- slashdot / reddit / digg and the other nerdy sites seem to ignore it and I wish this site would treat it like what it is as well.
And when a TC story ends up on the HN front page, I enjoy reading HN comments. Because there is no way in hell that I'm going to read the comments directly on the TC article.
And completely agreed with your point on HN comments for TC stories. That is a nice side-effect.