gqgy

Hey buddy,

Thanks for the feedback. We've gotten a lot of the feedback. What we did was make the frontpage more clearer. It used to be images/videos on the frontpage, but they were now replaced by Product Boxes.

Pre-ordering is currently being contemplating. What do you think?

horyd, thanks for the feedback. We'll definitely be making it more translucent. We realize the need to make the pictures speak for themselves. Thanks so much for this. If you have any other observation, I would love to hear about them. Feel free to email me at grant(at)hypejar(dot)com.

Hi xauronx,

Thanks for the feedback. What you say actually confirms what we've been hating ourselves! What we're gonna be doing is making the pics less dark when hovering over. We're also gonna be pushing the buttons to the top left so that you don't have place your cover in a "crack."

Thanks so much for your observation.

RossH,

That's freaking awesome feedback. It's awesome because we're actually gonna be modifying the hover over the items. (I've realized that I hate it too!)

Feel free to email me personally. I would love to provide you with in-depth insight into Hypejar and would love to hear further feedback from you (if possible). grant(at)hypejar.com.

Hi, thanks so much for the feedback.

We're not trying to be Pinterest for men. While the frontpage may seem similar to them, our content really centers around future products. In the process, what we're trying to do is to get a good sense of how much others are anticipating the products. (for example, what is the lineup for the next iPhone gonna look like)

I do understand that it is slightly confusing. It's a quiet launch so that we can tweak it and make it as best as possible. What part of the navigation more specifically do you find is a bit confusing?

That's a fair question Kevin. The reason we embarked on this project was because there is no single place on the Internet right now where you can see what is coming out in the future. There may be information, but it is scattered across various sites and blogs. We provide that one place.

More importantly, it provides the answer to the question: how one can find or look for something when that person does not know its existence?

Hypejar is still in its infancy and we're continuously working to make it better and more informative.

Thanks for your feedback! Much appreciated.

That's a good question. Firstly, Metacritic focuses its score/reviews of critics and not really the public. Hypejar on the other hand, focuses on the level anticipation of the general public before a product releases.

Secondly, Hypejar focuses only on products before they release whereas Metacritic does both pre and post release of products.

Hypejar also offers notification system for upcoming releases and features such as the Browse and the Calendar.

So to answer your question, it's not really to "switch over" users, but to rather offer something vastly different.

$80k goal sounds slightly modest for a mass consumer tech product like FloJack. Anyways, I would definitely get it. That is, until Apple themselves don't somehow implement this.

Best of luck to you guys. I always root for Kickstarter companies. (Note: working on a site that can help you guys pump hype into your project http://www.hypejar.com/FloJack).

Go get 'em!

Will soon be launching site with information on products releasing in the future and to gauge level of anticipation of people.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4379664

Wish you the best of luck with your app!

Clickable: http://www.hypejar.com

Clickable: http://www.twitter.com/hypejar

Clickable: http://www.facebook.com/hypejar

i know a wonjun on yc news and a couple in real life.

how about facebook taking over as the "ultimate social environment" to whatever it is right now? reason why i throw that out there is because it has many functions all in one: email, photos, IM, etc.

Introduction to Marketing and Securities Law.

i think him and his team have done a great job with facebook. although he does lack on the public speaking front, he does compensate for it. bill g. was once just an inarticulate, uncharismatic, scrawny geek, but numbers show that he hasn't done too bad for himself.

thank you for prioritizing my life. i couldn't have done it without you and your wisdom.

no one can draw a line like that. everyone wants to see their own investment reap profits.

secondly, VCs mandates are not to rape your business. their goal is to make money. whether they end up raping your business by trying to make money is another topic all together. that is why it is important to find the appropriate VC for your business. if you find the right one and play it right, you should not get 'raped'.

that story is either fiction or that specific millionaire is dumb. it takes a significant amount of time (i.e. several minutes to hours to days) to get a loan. a person driving a ferrari would not invest the time for that amount of money.

the major difference between an angel and a VC is that the former normally invests his own funds. on the other hand, VCs manage a pool of money invested by others through a fund.

That's a great point of view. Although I excluded money in my question, I am aware that that can only be done in a hypothetical world. I also agree that there are different levels of success. I suppose it is very reasonable to view success as a process rather than an end. The various levels of success which you outline makes sense, however I was wondering whether there was a level beyound money (i.e. Level 7 in your outline) for other entrepreneurs.

I have not yet reached a "Level 7" in my endeavors as an entrepreneur, but I have a feeling that it goes beyond "Level 7".

I guess my suspicion comes from observing those that have already reached "success" in the start-up world. For example, why would PG still work after reaching the elusive "Level 7"/MONEY, why would Steve Jobs keep working, etc....

I suppose one can interpret my question as a bout with "existential crisis". Defining 'success' in the framework of an entire life is more of a philosophical exercise, which I'd rather not go into as of yet.

"1: Make the GUI that I outlined in my first YC application, an interface intended to make the internet really easy to use for non-traditional users of computers." The latter was a great answer and it was the sort of answer I was looking for.

I simply believe that there can be a greater objective in a start-up than a simple exit event. I think eBay was a success cause it had a large impact on shopping online and in fact created an entire new market; Amazon pretty much legitimized online shopping; Hotmail brought web-based email to the masses; TripAdvisor introduced reliable, user-generated opinions for all things related to travel, etc.

I personally believe that a start-up's impact on society and/or business is more important than anything else.

That may be one of the indicators (and a shallow indicator at that) of success, but I'd be hard-pressed to use it as a threshold or a point of satisfaction in terms of success. Wouldn't a start-up have much more meaning to a founder? Normally, when one comes up with an idea, it addresses a need in the world or a better way to do things.

Others have asked me for advice, but in no way do I feel that I have accomplished my mission. There are greater and more substantial objectives other than being asked advices or receiving praise.

My question was, what is 'success'?

can you elaborate on that?

this strategy is about gaining and maintaining market share. 'pleasing customers' is merely a pheripheral initiative to the overall strategy of market share. jobs is an innovator, but he does it by sticking to old school traditional business strategies. i wouldn't be surprised, if sometime in the next decade, apple is accused of 'bundling', similarly to microsoft with IE and windows. apple has been gaining market share little by little in various industries. once their share reaches a dominant position, its products will become dependent on each other. until they reach that position, jobs will be the nicest guy in the industry.