Full Width 
Shortcuts 
Sign Up 
Log In 
Articles 
Reading List More from Joel Gascoigne's blog
Fourteen years It's a little hard to believe. Fourteen years ago today, I launched Buffer from my apartment in Birmingham, in the UK. The launch came seven weeks after I started working on the project on the side as a contract web developer. For a few weeks, I called it bfffr until I realized that no one knew how to pronounce it. Sometimes it's better to be clear than clever. So it became bufferapp.com. Even then, people thought we were called Buffer App for a while! Eventually we were able to acquire buffer.com and clear up the confusion altogether. When I started Buffer, I had no idea how far it could come. This was a case where the dream formed over time, rather than being fully formed on day one. There's a dogma that you need to have complete clarity of the vision and outcome before you even start (and go all-in and full-time, which I also disagree with). I think there's a beauty in starting with a small dream. It just so happens that every big thing started small. Early on, my dream was just to create a tool that made it easy to Tweet consistently, build it for myself and others, and make enough money to cover my living expenses and go full-time on it. The number for me to be able to work on it full-time was £1,200 per month, and that felt almost out of reach in the beginning. Today, Buffer generates $1.65 million per month, serves 59,000 customers, and enables fulfilling work for 72 people. I've had many dreams with Buffer, each one progressively becoming more ambitious. To me it's always felt like I can just about see the horizon, and once I get there, I see a new horizon to strive for. I've tried to embrace that Buffer can continue to evolve as I, the team, and customers do. A lot happens as a founder and as a business in fourteen years. I started the company when I was 23. I was young, ambitious, and had so much to learn. My naivety served me well in so many ways. At the same time, I like to think that the years have given me a more intentional, decisive approach to business. Broadly, it feels like we've had three eras to the company so far. In our first era, we found traction, we built swiftly and with fervor, we grew a special community of users and customers, and we did it all in our own way. We were a remote company before almost anyone else, and were part of the earliest days of building in public. There's so much we did right in that first era, though we also had wind in our sails which masked our errors and immaturity. The second era of Buffer was marked by growing pains, a struggle to understand who we really are, missteps and through that, transformation, clarity, and new beginnings. These years were very much the messy middle of Buffer. They were also where I experienced my lowest lows in the journey so far. As hard as this experience was, I am grateful as it was the path I needed to walk in order to grow as a leader, cement our independence and long-term ambitions, rediscover Buffer's purpose, and start to operate with greater conviction. We're a couple of chapters into our current era. With a renewed focus on entrepreneurs, creators, and small businesses, we started making bolder moves to serve them and create a more unique offering in what had become a very crowded and commoditized space. Through a clearer strategy, strengthening our culture, and improving how we work as a team, we emerged from a multi-year decline. Last year, we turned the ship around and had a flat year. This year, we're on track for over 10% growth and a profitable year. It doesn't feel like a coincidence to me that this final era has also been the phase where I've experienced one of the most joyful and demanding experiences as a human: becoming a parent. I have a wife and I have two young boys, and they mean the world to me. I also started prioritizing my community of family and friends, as well as cultivating hobbies again. I spend time on my health and fitness, try to keep up my skiing, and recently picked up playing the piano again. Time has become a lot more precious, and with that, clarity and conviction are more vital than ever. As much as it sometimes feels hard to fit everything in, to me, it's the whole package that makes life fulfilling. When I really stop to take a step back, I feel very lucky that I've been able to do this for fourteen years. It's a long time in any sense. In tech and social media it feels like almost a lifetime already. And yet, just like those early days when I could barely imagine reaching £1,200 per month, I'm still looking toward that next horizon. I see a clear opportunity to help entrepreneurs, creators and small businesses get off the ground, grow, and thrive long-term. Photo by Simon Berger on Unsplash.
Build Week at Buffer: What it is and how we’re approaching it Note: this was originally posted on the Buffer blog. We’ve dedicated the week of August 22nd to a brand new internal initiative called Build Week. We’ll all be putting aside our regular work for a single week to come together in small groups and work on ideas that can benefit customers or us as a company, ideally with something of value shipped or in place by the end. The inspiration for Build Week Before building Buffer, I had several formative experiences attending “build a startup in a weekend”-type events. Two I attended were run by Launch48, and another was Startup Weekend. Anyone could sign up to attend no matter what skill set or experience level they would bring. As long as you were willing to roll up your sleeves, build something, and contribute in any way, you’d be very welcome. The focus was on building something rapidly from end to end, within the space of a weekend. Teams would be capped to a small number, around three to five people per team, so the groups could move quickly with decision making. Once the teams were formed, you’d get to work and start doing research, building, and marketing (often all in parallel) to move as fast as possible in building a minimum viable product and achieving a level of validation. At the end of the weekend, teams would present what they achieved, what they validated, and what they learned. Through these events, I met people, formed strong bonds, and stayed in contact for years with them afterward. Some teams even became startups. It felt like highly accelerated learning, and it was intense but fun, very energizing and inspiring. I’ve been thinking about how this could translate to Buffer and why it would be so powerful for us in our current season, which is where Build Week comes in. What is Build Week? Build Week is a week at Buffer where we’ll form teams, work with people we don’t typically work with, and work together on an idea we feel called towards. The highest level goals of Build Week are to inject into the company and team a spirit of shipping, creativity, and innovation, making progress and decisions rapidly, comfort with uncertainty, and ultimately going from idea to usable value out in the world in the space of a week. When it comes to the type of projects we’ll work on and the skill sets required to accomplish them, the goal is for those to be far-reaching. While it may seem like Build Week would be more suited to engineers specifically, our goal is to achieve the outcome that everyone realizes they are and can be a Builder. Ultimately, being a Builder in Buffer Build Week will mean that you are part of a team that successfully makes a change that brings value, and it happens in the short period of a week. Everyone on the team has something to bring to this goal, and I'm excited by the various projects that will be worked on. How we’re approaching Build Week With our high-level vision and ideas for Build Week, several months ago we got to work to bring this concept to life and make it happen. The first thing we did was form a team to plan and design Build Week itself. Staying true to our vision for Build Week itself, where we want to have small teams of people who don’t normally work together, this is also how we approached forming the Build Week Planning team. With this team in place, we started meeting weekly. Overall, it has been a small time commitment of 45 minutes per week to plan and design Build Week. As we got closer to the actual week, we started meeting for longer and having real working sessions. Our final design for Build Week consisted of three key stages: Idea Gathering, Team Formation and Build Week. For the Idea Gathering stage, we created a Trello board where anyone in the team could contribute an idea. We used voting and commenting on the cards, which helped narrow the ideas to those that would be worked on during Build Week. We gave people a few days to submit ideas and received 78 total contributions. This was a big win and a clear indication of a big appetite for Build Week within the company. The Team Formation stage was a trickier problem to solve and determine the process for. Initially, we had hoped that this could be entirely organic, with people gravitating towards an idea and joining up with people who are also excited to work on that idea. Ultimately, we realized that if we approached it this way, we would likely struggle with our goal of having people work with folks they don’t normally work with, and we wouldn’t have enough control over other aspects, such as the time zones within each team. All of this could jeopardize the success of Build Week itself. So we arrived at a hybrid, where we created a Google Form for people to submit their top 3 choices of ideas they’d like to work on. With that information, we determined the teams and made every effort to put people in a team they had put down as a choice. And the final stage is, of course, Build Week itself! The teams have now been formed, and we created a Slack channel for each team to start organizing themselves. We are providing some very lightweight guidance, and we will have a few required deliverables, but other than that, we are leaving it to each team to determine the best way to work together to create value during the week. If you're a Buffer customer, one small note that as we embrace this company-wide event and time together, we will be shifting our focus slightly away from the support inbox. We will still be responding to your questions and problems with Buffer; however, we may be slightly slower than usual. We also won't be publishing any new content on the blog. We’re confident that this time for the team to bond and build various projects of value will ultimately benefit all Buffer customers. Why right now is the time for Build Week at Buffer 2022 has been a different year for Buffer. We’re in a position of flatter to declining revenue, and we’ve been working hard to find our path back to healthy, sustainable growth. One key element of this effort has been actively embracing being a smaller company. We’re still a small company, and we serve small businesses. Unless we lean into this, we will lose many of our advantages. We want to drive more connection across the team in a time where we’ve felt it lacking for the past couple of years. While we’ve been remote for most of our 11+ years of existence, we’ve always found a ton of value from company retreats where we all meet in person, and we’ve suffered during the pandemic where we’ve not been able to have these events. Build Week is an opportunity for us to do that with a whole new concept and event rather than trying to do it with something like a virtual retreat which would likely never be able to live up to our previous retreat experiences. There’s a big opportunity for exchanging context and ideas of current Buffer challenges within teams where the teams are cross-functional and with people who don’t normally work together. This could help us for months afterward. Build Week can also be a time where strong bonds, both in work and personally, are formed. My dream would be that after Build Week, people within their teams hit each other up in Slack and jump on a spontaneous catch-up call once in a while because they’ve become close during the week. We’ve had engineering hack weeks for a long time now. Those have been awesome in their way, but they have been very contained to engineering. And while those events created a lot of value, they often lacked perspectives that would have enhanced the work, such as customer advocacy, design, culture, or operational perspectives. As a company, we want to challenge some of the processes we have built up over the past few years. Build Week is like a blank canvas – we clear out a whole week and then diligently decide what we need in terms of structure and process to make this concept thrive and no more. This can act as inspiration for us going forward, where we can use the week as an example of rethinking process and questioning the ways we do things. The opportunity that comes with Build Week If we are successful with Build Week, I am confident that we will surprise ourselves with just how much value is created by the whole company in that one week alone. In embracing being a small company, we’re currently striving to challenge ourselves by moving at a faster pace without over-working. I think this is possible, and the completely different nature of how we work together in Build Week could give us ideas for what we can adjust to work more effectively and productively together in our regular flow of work. The opportunity for value creation within Build Week goes far beyond product features or improvements. Build Week will be a time for us to build anything that serves either customers or the team in pursuit of our vision and mission, or strengthens and upholds our values. We can stretch ourselves in the possibilities – there could be a marketing campaign, a data report, improving an existing process in the company, rethinking our tools, creating a new element of transparency, bringing our customers together, etc. Wish us luck! I believe Build Week can be one of the most fun, high-energy weeks we’ve had in years. I expect we can come out of the week on a high that can fuel us with motivation and enjoyment of our work for months. That is a worthy goal and something I think we can achieve with a little creativity and the right group of people designing and planning the event. Of course, part of the beauty of Build Week itself is that just like all the ideas and the freedom to choose how you work in a team, we don’t know everything we’ll learn as a company by doing this. It could be chaotic, there could be challenges, and there will undoubtedly be many insights, but we will be better off for having gone through the process. Please wish us all luck as we head into next week. There’s a lot of excitement in the company to create value. We hope to have new features to share with you in the coming weeks, and we’ll be back soon with a post sharing how it went. Have you tried something like Build Week before? If so, how did it go? I’d love to hear from you on Twitter. Photo by C Dustin on Unsplash.
Our vision for location-independent salaries at Buffer Note: this was originally posted on the Buffer blog. I’m happy to share that we’ve established a long-term goal that salaries at Buffer will not be based on location. We made our first step towards this last year, when we moved from four cost-of-living based location bands for salaries to two bands. We did this by eliminating the lower two location bands The change we made resulted in salary increases for 55 of 85 team members, with the increase being on average $10,265. When the time is right, we will be eliminating the concept of cost-of-living based location bands entirely, which will lead to a simpler approach to providing generous, fair and transparent salaries at Buffer. In this post I’m sharing my thinking behind this change and our approach to pay overall. Location and Salaries It’s been interesting to see the conversation about location and salaries unfold both within Buffer and beyond. We’ve heard from many teammates over the years about the pros and cons of the location factor, and of course we’ve watched with interest as this became a regular topic of conversation within the larger remote work community. I've had many healthy debates with other remote leaders, and there are arguments for eliminating a location component which I haven’t agreed with. I don’t believe pay differences across locations is unethical, and it has made a lot of sense for us in the past. However, the last few years have seen a lot of change for remote teams. A change like this isn't to be made lightly, and at our scale comes with considerations. Our Compensation Philosophy Compensation is always slowly evolving as companies and markets mature and change. We’ve been through several major iterations of our salary formula, and myriad small tweaks throughout the last 8 or so years since we launched the initial version. Part of the fun of having a salary formula is knowing that it’s never going to be “done.” Knowing that the iterations would continue, Caryn, our VP of Finance, and I worked together to establish our compensation philosophy and document our principles on compensation to help us determine what should always be true even as the salary formula changes over time. We arrived at four principles that guide our decisions around compensation. We strive for Buffer’s approach to salary, equity, and benefits to be: Transparent Simple Fair Generous These are the tenets that have guided us through compensation decisions over the years. After we articulated them as our compensation principles, we were able to look at the location factor of our formula with new clarity. There are a few key considerations that were part of our discussions and my decision to put Buffer on a path towards removing our location factor from salaries that I'll go into more detail about next. Transparency, Simplicity, and Trust Our salary formula is one of the fundamental reasons that we can share our salaries transparently. Having a spreadsheet of team salaries is a huge step toward transparency, but true transparency is reached when the formula is simple, straightforward, easy to understand, and importantly, easy to use. In one of our earlier versions of the salary formula, we calculated the cost-of-living multiplier for every new location when we made an offer. That was cumbersome, and it meant that a candidate couldn’t truly know their salary range until we calculated that. This was improved greatly when we moved to the concept of “cost-of-living bands.”. After that, different cities and towns could more easily be classified into each band. This massively increased the transparency of the formula, and I think it helped create a lot more trust in this system. Anyone could relatively easily understand which band their location fit into, and with that knowledge understand the exact salary they'd receive at Buffer. This type of immediate understanding of the salary formula, and ability to run calculations yourself, is where transparency really gains an extra level of impact and drives trust within and beyond the team. However, with our four cost-of-living bands, there were still decisions to be made around where locations fall, and this has been the topic of much healthy and productive debate over the years. The conversations around locations falling between the Average and High bands is what led us to introduce the Intermediate band. And with four choices of location, it has meant there is some disparity in salaries across the team. With the benefits that come from the powerful combination of transparency and simplicity, alongside the increased trust that is fostered with more parity across the team, I’m choosing to drive Buffer’s salary formula in the direction of eventually having no cost-of-living factor. Freedom and Flexibility We’ve long taken approaches to work which have been grounded in the ideal of an increased level of freedom and flexibility as a team member. When I started Buffer, I wanted greater freedom and a better quality of life than I felt would be possible by working at a company. That came in various forms, including location freedom, flexibility of working hours, and financial freedom. And as we’ve built the company, I’ve been proud that we’ve built a culture where every single team member can experience an unusual and refreshing level of freedom and flexibility. Since the earliest days, one of our most fondly held values has been to Improve Consistently, and in particular this line: “We choose to be where we are the happiest and most productive”. This is a value that has supported and encouraged teammates to travel and try living in different cities, in search of that “happiest and most productive” place. It has enabled people to find work they love and great co-workers, from a hometown near family where it would be hard to find a local company that can offer that same experience and challenge. It has also enabled people to travel in order to support their partner in an important career change involving a move, something which allows an often stressful change to happen much more smoothly, since you can keep working at Buffer from anywhere in the world. Having a culture that has supported moving freely across the globe has been a powerful level of freedom and flexibility. That freedom has been matched with a salary system which adjusts compensation to accommodate those changes in a fair and appropriate way. However, knowing that your salary will fluctuate and can decrease due to a choice to be somewhere else, does limit that freedom and the ability to make a decision to move. Moving towards a salary formula with parity across all locations, will enable an even greater level of freedom and flexibility. It feels clear to me that choosing to move is a personal or a family decision, and it is ideal if Buffer salaries are structured in a way that honor and support that reality. I’m excited that working towards removing our cost-of-living differences will help significantly reduce the friction involved in making a potentially positively life-changing decision to live in a different city or country. Results, Independence, and Reward At Buffer, we are not on the typical hyper-growth VC path. This comes with some constraints: we don’t have tens of millions in funding and unlimited capital to deploy in an attempt to find a rapid path to $100m and going public (thankfully, that’s not our goal). This path also means that our experiences as teammates in a variety of ways are directly tied to whether we are successfully serving existing and new customers. For example, the level of benefits, ability to travel (in normal times), and competitiveness of compensation, are very much driven by our revenue growth and profitability. But, this is independence too. The thing we often need to remind ourselves of, is that while we may feel more constrained at times, we have full freedom of what we do with the success we achieve. Making a choice like this is one example of that. It is my intention as founder / CEO that as we succeed together as a company, we all benefit from that success and see adjustments that improve our quality of life and create wealth. We are in a position of profitability which allows us to take a significant step towards removing the cost-of-living factor from our salary framework, which I believe serves those goals. And removing it entirely will be determined by us successfully executing on our strategy and serving customers well. Reducing Cost-of-Living Bands The way our salary formula works is that we benchmark a teammate’s role based on market data at the 50th percentile for the software industry in San Francisco and then multiply that by the cost-of-living band. So, a Product Marketer benchmark at the 50th percentile of the San Francisco market data is $108,838. Depending on the teammate’s location this would be multiplied by a cost-of-living band (Low, Average, Intermediate or High). For example, if they lived Boulder, Colorado, a city with Average cost-of-living, the benchmark would be multiplied by 0.85 for a salary of $92,512. To best reflect our compensation philosophy, company values, and the path we want for Buffer, we have eliminated the Low and Average cost-of-living bands. What we’ve done is brought all Low (.75 multiplier) and Average (.85 multiplier) salaries up to Intermediate (.9 multiplier), which we now call our Global band. This is what resulted in 55 teammates seeing on average an increase to their salary of $10,265. Our two bands are now Global (.9 multiplier) and High (1.0 multiplier). This change is based on my vision for Buffer and how being a part of this team affects each of us as individually, as well as the direction I believe the world is going. I’m excited about the change first and foremost because it supports our goal of having a transparent, simple, fair, and generous approach to compensation. This is also a move that raised salaries right away for more than half of the team. This point in particular gives me a lot of joy because I want compensation to be one of the incredible parts of working at Buffer. Money isn’t everything, and we all need kind and smart colleagues, a psychologically safe environment, and to work on challenging and interesting problems, in order to be fulfilled at work. Beyond that, however, money really impacts life choices, and that’s ultimately what I want for every Bufferoo; the freedom to choose their own lifestyle and make choices for themselves and their families’ long-term health and happiness. It’s important to me that people who choose to spend their years at Buffer will have the freedom to make their own choices to have a great life. And, for our teammates who live in much lower cost-of-living areas, a Buffer salary could end up being truly life changing. I’m really happy with that outcome. The decision was also impacted by the direction that I believe the world is going (and, the direction we want to help it go). Remote is in full swing, and it’s increasingly breaking down geographical borders. I believe this is a great thing. Looking ahead 10 or even 5 years, it seems to me that we’re going to see a big rebalancing, or correction, that’s going to happen. I believe it’s important to be ahead of these types of shifts, and be proactively choosing the path that’s appropriate and energizing for us. What next? Our plan is to eventually get to one single location band, essentially eliminating the cost-of-living factor from the salary formula altogether. This will be possible once we can afford to make this change and sustain our commitment to profitability. So, this will be driven by the long-term results we create from our hard work, creativity in the market, and commitment to customers. What questions does this spark for you? Send me a tweet with your thoughts. Photo by Javier Allegue Barros on Unsplash.
More in programming
Hold my hand, grow my skin Erica Western Geiger Counter Do you have any addictions? You may not register them as such, perhaps because they don’t lead to anything you consider harmful consequences. But you have them. In some ways, all your behavior is compulsive. What would the alternative be? A point is, if we have something that we can predict this video Free will comes from the “veil of computability”, things look random until you find the pattern. I was at a bar last night and this girl told me you can’t predict humans, and the exact example she used was that it’s not like y = mx + b Oh, if only she knew. The dreams of my childhood have come true, studying machine learning has shown me how I work. I tried to explain that instead of 2 parameters it’s 100 trillion parameters, and it’s the slightly different y = relu(w@x) + b a bunch of times, you have to put some nonlinearities in there cause linear systems can only approximate a small class of functions. But this explanation was not heard at a bar. She was so confident she was right, and like I don’t even know where to start. Reader of this blog, do you know? AI is coming and we are so unbelievably unprepared. What is this garbage and this garbage. It’s nerd shit and political propaganda. The amount of power over nature that the Silicon Valley death cult is stumbling into is horrifying, and these high priests don’t have a basic grasp of people. No humanities education (perhaps the programs were gutted on purpose). Are we ready for the hypnodrones? How the fuck is targeted advertising legal and culturally okay? This will not stop until they take our free will from us. There’s a fire that burns today Better Nukes don’t end humanity. Current path AI doesn’t end humanity. It just ends all the machines and hands the world over to the street people. Now I see how the dark ages happened. If all the humans died today, all the machines would shortly follow. If all the machines died today, humanity would keep on going. Pay attention to this milestone. To date, machines are not robust, and evolution may be efficient at robust search. If it is, we get dark ages. If it’s not and we find a shortcut, God only knows.
This is re-post of How to Permanently Increase Your Sales by 50% or More in Only One Day article by Steve Pavlina Of all the things you can do to increase your sales, one of the highest leverage activities is attempting to increase your products’ registration rate. Increasing your registration rate from 1.0% to 1.5% means that you simply convince one more downloader out of every 200 to make the decision to buy. Yet that same tiny increase will literally increase your sales by a full 50%. If you’re one of those developers who simply slapped the ubiquitous 30-day trial incentive on your shareware products without going any further than that, then I think a 50% increase in your registration rate is a very attainable goal you can achieve if you spend just one full day of concentrated effort on improving your product’s ability to sell. My hope is that this article will get you off to a good start and get you thinking more creatively. And even if you fail, your result might be that you achieve only a 25% or a 10% increase. How much additional money would that represent to you over the next five years of sales? What influence, if any, did the title of this article have on your decision to read it? If I had titled this article, “Registration Incentives,” would you have been more or less likely to read it now? Note that the title expresses a specific and clear benefit to you. It tells you exactly what you can expect to gain by reading it. Effective registration incentives work the same way. They offer clear, specific benefits to the user if a purchase is made. In order to improve your registration incentives, the first thing you need to do is to adopt some new beliefs that will change your perspective. I’m going to introduce you to what I call the “lies of success” in the shareware industry. These are statements that are not true at all, but if you accept them as true anyway, you’ll achieve far better results than if you don’t. Rule 1: What you are selling is merely the difference between the shareware and the registered versions, not the registered version itself. Note that this is not a true statement, but if you accept it as true, you’ll immediately begin to see the weaknesses in your registration incentives. If there are few additional benefits for buying the full version vs. using the shareware version, then you aren’t offering the user strong enough incentives to make the full purchase. Rule 2: The sole purpose of the shareware version is to close the sale. This is our second lie of success. Note the emphasis on the word “close.” Your shareware version needs to act as a direct sales vehicle. It must be able to take the user all the way to the point of purchase, i.e. your online order form, ideally with nothing more than a few mouse clicks. Anything that detracts from achieving a quick sale is likely to hurt sales. Rule 3: The customer’s perspective is the only one that matters. Defy this rule at your peril. Customers don’t care that you spent 2000 hours creating your product. Customers don’t care that you deserve the money for your hard work. Customers don’t care that you need to do certain things to prevent piracy. All that matters to them are their own personal wants and needs. Yes, these are lies of success. Some customers will care, but if you design your registration incentives assuming they only care about their own self-interests, your motivation to buy will be much stronger than if you merely appeal to their sense of honesty, loyalty, or honor. Assume your customers are all asking, “What’s in it for me if I choose to buy? What will I get? How will this help me?” I don’t care if you’re selling to Fortune 500 companies. At some point there will be an individual responsible for causing the purchase to happen, and that individual is going to consider how the purchase will affect him/her personally: “Will this purchase get me fired? Will it make me look good in front of my peers? Will this make my job easier or harder?” Many shareware developers get caught in the trap of discriminating between honest and dishonest users, believing that honest users will register and dishonest ones won’t. This line of thinking will ultimately get you nowhere, and it violates the third lie of success. When you make a purchase decision, how often do you use honesty as the deciding factor? Do you ever say, “I will buy this because I’m honest?” Or do you consider other more selfish factors first, such as how it will make you feel to purchase the software? The truth is that every user believes s/he is honest, so no user applies the honesty criterion when making a purchase decision. Thinking of your users in terms of honest ones vs. dishonest ones is a complete waste of time because that’s not how users primarily view themselves. Rule 4: Customers buy on emotion and justify with fact. If you’re honest with yourself, you’ll see that this is how you make most purchase decisions. Remember the last time you bought a computer. Is it fair to say that you first became emotionally attached to the idea of owning a new machine? For me, it’s the feeling of working faster, owning the latest technology, and being more productive that motivates me to go computer shopping. Once I’ve become emotionally committed, the justifications follow: “It’s been two years since I’ve upgraded, it will pay for itself with the productivity boost I gain, I can easily afford it, I’ve worked hard and I deserve a new machine, etc.” You use facts to justify the purchase. Once you understand how purchase decisions are made, you can see that your shareware products need to first get the user emotionally invested in the purchase, and then you give them all the facts they need to justify it. Now that we’ve gotten these four lies of success out of the way, let’s see how we might apply them to create some compelling registration incentives. Let’s start with Rule 1. What incentives can be spawned from this rule? The common 30-day trial is one obvious derivative. If you are only selling the difference between the shareware and registered versions, then a 30-day trial implies that you are selling unlimited future days of usage of the program after the trial period expires. This is a powerful incentive, and it’s been proven effective for products that users will continue to use month after month. 30-day trials are easy for users to understand, and they’re also easy to implement. You could also experiment with other time periods such as 10 days, 14 days, or 90 days. The only way of truly knowing which will work best for your products is to experiment. But let’s see if we can move a bit beyond the basic 30-day trial here by mixing in a little of Rule 3. How would the customer perceive a 30-day trial? In most cases 30 days is plenty of time to evaluate a product. But in what situations would a 30-day trial have a negative effect? A good example is when the user downloads, installs, and briefly checks out a product s/he may not have time to evaluate right away. By the time the user gets around to fully evaluating it, the shareware version has already expired, and a sale may be lost as a result. To get around this limitation, many shareware developers have started offering 30 days of actual program usage instead of 30 consecutive days. This allows the user plenty of time to try out the program at his/her convenience. Another possibility would be to limit the number of times the program can be run. The basic idea is that you are giving away limited usage and selling unlimited usage of the program. This incentive definitely works if your product is one that will be used frequently over a long period of time (much longer than the trial period). The flip side of usage limitation is to offer an additional bonus for buying within a certain period of time. For instance, in my game Dweep, I offer an extra 5 free bonus levels to everyone who buys within the first 10 days. In truth I give the bonus levels to everyone who buys, but the incentive is real from the customer’s point of view. Remember Rule 3 - it doesn’t matter what happens on my end; it only matters what the customer perceives. Any customer that buys after the first 10 days will be delighted anyway to receive a bonus they thought they missed. So if your product has no time-based incentives at all, this is the first place to start. When would you pay your bills if they were never due, and no interest was charged on late payments? Use time pressure to your advantage, either by disabling features in the shareware version after a certain time or by offering additional bonuses for buying sooner rather than later. If nothing else and if it’s legal in your area, offer a free entry in a random monthly drawing for a small prize, such as one of your other products, for anyone who buys within the first X days. Another logical derivative of Rule 1 is the concept of feature limitation. On the crippling side, you can start with the registered version and begin disabling functionality to create the shareware version. Disabling printing in a shareware text editor is a common strategy. So is corrupting your program’s output with a simple watermark. For instance, your shareware editor could print every page with your logo in the background. Years ago the Association of Shareware Professionals had a strict policy against crippling, but that policy was abandoned, and crippling has been recognized as an effective registration incentive. It is certainly possible to apply feature limitation without having it perceived as crippling. This is especially easy for games, which commonly offer a limited number of playable levels in the shareware version with many more levels available only in the registered version. In this situation you offer the user a seemingly complete experience of your product in the shareware version, and you provide additional features on top of that for the registered version. Time-based incentives and feature-based incentives are perhaps the two most common strategies used by shareware developers for enticing users to buy. Which will work best for you? You will probably see the best results if you use both at the same time. Imagine you’re the end user for a moment. Would you be more likely to buy if you were promised additional features and given a deadline to make the decision? I’ve seen several developers who were using only one of these two strategies increase their registration rates dramatically by applying the second strategy on top of the first. If you only use time-based limitations, how could you apply feature limitation as well? Giving the user more reasons to buy will translate to more sales per download. One you have both time-based and feature-based incentives to buy, the next step is to address the user’s perceived risk by applying a risk-reversal strategy. Fortunately, the shareware model already reduces the perceived risk of purchasing significantly, since the user is able to try before buying. But let’s go a little further, keeping Rule 3 in mind. What else might be a perceived risk to the user? What if the user reaches the end of the trial period and still isn’t certain the product will do what s/he needs? What if the additional features in the registered version don’t work as the user expects? What can we do to make the decision to purchase safer for the user? One approach is to offer a money-back guarantee. I’ve been offering a 60-day unconditional money-back guarantee on all my products since January 2000. If someone asks for their money back for any reason, I give them a full refund right away. So what is my return rate? Well, it’s about 8%. Just kidding! Would it surprise you to learn that my return rate at the time of this writing is less than 0.2%? Could you handle two returns out of every 1000 sales? My best estimate is that this one technique increased my sales by 5-10%, and it only took a few minutes to implement. When I suggest this strategy to other shareware developers, the usual reaction is fear. “But everyone would rip me off,” is a common response. I suggest trying it for yourself on an experimental basis; a few brave souls have already tried it and are now offering money-back guarantees prominently. Try putting it up on your web site for a while just to convince yourself it works. You can take it down at any time. After a few months, if you’re happy with the results, add the guarantee to your shareware products as well. I haven’t heard of one bad outcome yet from those who’ve tried it. If you use feature limitation in your shareware products, another important component of risk reversal is to show the user exactly what s/he will get in the full version. In Dweep I give away the first five levels in the demo version, and purchasing the full version gets you 147 more levels. When I thought about this from the customer’s perspective (Rule 3), I realized that a perceived risk is that s/he doesn’t know if the registered version levels will be as fun as the demo levels. So I released a new demo where you can see every level but only play the first five. This lets the customer see all the fun that awaits them. So if you have a feature-limited product, show the customer how the feature will work. For instance, if your shareware version has printing disabled, the customer could be worried that the full version’s print capability won’t work with his/her printer or that the output quality will be poor. A better strategy is to allow printing, but to watermark the output. This way the customer can still test and verify the feature, and it doesn’t take much imagination to realize what the output will look like without the watermark. Our next step is to consider Rule 2 and include the ability close the sale. It is imperative that you include an “instant gratification” button in your shareware products, so the customer can click to launch their default web browser and go directly to your online order form. If you already have a “buy now” button in your products, go a step further. A small group of us have been finding that the more liberally these buttons are used, the better. If you only have one or two of these buttons in your shareware program, you should increase the count by at least an order of magnitude. The current Dweep demo now has over 100 of these buttons scattered throughout the menus and dialogs. This makes it extremely easy for the customer to buy, since s/he never has to hunt around for the ordering link. What should you label these buttons? “Buy now” or “Register now” are popular, so feel free to use one of those. I took a slightly different approach by trying to think like a customer (Rule 3 again). As a customer the word “buy” has a slightly negative association for me. It makes me think of parting with my cash, and it brings up feelings of sacrifice and pressure. The words “buy now” imply that I have to give away something. So instead, I use the words, “Get now.” As a customer I feel much better about getting something than buying something, since “getting” brings up only positive associations. This is the psychology I use, but at present, I don’t know of any hard data showing which is better. Unless you have a strong preference, trust your intuition. Make it as easy as possible for the willing customer to buy. The more methods of payment you accept, the better your sales will be. Allow the customer to click a button to print an order form directly from your program and mail it with a check or money order. On your web order form, include a link to a printable text order form for those who are afraid to use their credit cards online. If you only accept two or three major credit cards, sign up with a registration service to handle orders for those you don’t accept. So far we’ve given the customer some good incentives to buy, minimized perceived risk, and made it easy to make the purchase. But we haven’t yet gotten the customer emotionally invested in making the purchase decision. That’s where Rule 4 comes in. First, we must recognize the difference between benefits and features. We need to sell the sizzle, not the steak. Features describe your product, while benefits describe what the user will get by using your product. For instance, a personal information manager (PIM) program may have features such as daily, weekly, and monthly views; task and event timers; and a contact database. However, the benefits of the program might be that it helps the user be more organized, earn more money, and enjoy more free time. For a game, the main benefit might be fun. For a nature screensaver, it could be relaxation, beauty appreciation, or peace. Features are logical; benefits are emotional. Logical features are an important part of the sale, but only after we’ve engaged the customer’s emotions. Many products do a fair job of getting the customer emotionally invested during the trial period. If you have an addictive program or one that’s fun to use, such as a game, you may have an easy time getting the customer emotionally attached to using it because the experience is already emotional in nature. But whatever your product is, you can increase your sales by clearly illustrating the benefits of making the purchase. A good place to do this is in your nag screens. I use nag screens both before and after the program runs to remind the user of the benefits of buying the full version. At the very least, include a nag screen when the customer exits the program, so the last thing s/he sees will be a reminder of the product’s benefits. Take this opportunity to sell the user on the product. Don’t expect features like “customizable colors” to motivate anyone to buy. Paint a picture of what benefits the user will obtain with the full version. Will I save time? Will I have more fun? Will I live longer, save money, or feel better? The simple change from feature-oriented selling to benefit-oriented selling can easily double or triple your sales. Be sure to use this approach on your web site as well if you don’t already. Developers who’ve recently made the switch have been reporting some amazing results. If you’re drawing a blank when trying to come up with benefits for your products, the best thing you can do is to email some of your old customers and ask them why they bought your program. What did it do for them? I’ve done this and was amazed at the answers I got back. People were buying my games for reasons I’d never anticipated, and that told me which benefits I needed to emphasize in my sales pitch. The next key is to make your offer irresistible to potential customers. Find ways to offer the customer so much value that it would be harder to say no than to say yes. Take a look at your shareware product as if you were a potential customer who’d never seen it before. Being totally honest with yourself, would you buy this program if someone else had written it? If not, don’t stop here. As a potential customer, what additional benefits or features would put you over the top and convince you to buy? More is always better than less. In the original version of Dweep, I offered ten levels in the demo and thirty in the registered version. Now I offer only five demo levels and 152 in the full version, plus a built-in level editor. Originally, I offered the player twice the value of the demo; now I’m offering over thirty times the value. I also offer free hints and solutions to every level; the benefit here is that it minimizes player frustration. As I keep adding bonuses for purchasing, the offer becomes harder and harder to resist. What clever bonuses can you throw in for registering? Take the time to watch an infomercial. Notice that there is always at least one “FREE” bonus thrown in. Consider offering a few extra filters for an image editor, ten extra images for a screensaver, or extra levels for a game. What else might appeal to your customers? Be creative. Your bonus doesn’t even have to be software-based. Offer a free report about building site traffic with your HTML editor, include an essay on effective time management with your scheduling program, or throw in a small business success guide with your billing program. If you make such programs, you shouldn’t have too much trouble coming up with a few pages of text that would benefit your customers. Keep working at it until your offer even looks irresistible to you. If all the bonuses you offer can be delivered electronically, how many can you afford to include? If each one only gains one more customer in a thousand (0.1%), would it be worth the effort over the lifetime of your sales? So how do you know if your registration incentives are strong enough? And how do you know if your product is over-crippled? Where do you draw the line? These are tough issues, but there is a good way to handle them if your product is likely to be used over a long period of time, particularly if it’s used on a daily basis. Simply make your program gradually increase its registration incentives over time. One easy way to do this is with a delay timer on your nag screens that increases each time the program is run. Another approach is to disable certain features at set intervals. You begin by disabling non-critical features and gradually move up to disabling key functionality. The program becomes harder and harder to continue using for free, so the benefits of registering become more and more compelling. Instead of having your program completely disable itself after your trial period, you gradually degrade its usability with additional usage. This approach can be superior to a strict 30-day trial, since it allows your program to still be used for a while, but after prolonged usage it becomes effectively unusable. However, you don’t simply shock the user by taking away all the benefits s/he has become accustomed to on a particular day. Instead, you begin with a gentle reminder that becomes harder and harder to ignore. There may be times when your 30-day trial shuts off at an inconvenient time for the user, and you may lose a sale as a result. For instance, the user may not have the money at the time, or s/he may be busy at the trial’s end and forget to register. In that case s/he may quickly replace what was lost with a competitor’s trial version. The gradual degradation approach allows the user to continue using your product, but with increasing difficulty over time. Eventually, there is a breaking point where the user either decides to buy or to stop using the program completely, but this can be done within a window of time at the user’s convenience. Hopefully this article has gotten you thinking creatively about all the overlooked ways you can entice people to buy your shareware products. The most important thing you can do is to begin seeing your products through your customers’ eyes. What additional motivation would convince you to buy? What would represent an irresistible offer to you? There is no limit to how many incentives you can add. Don’t stop at just one or two; instead, give the customer a half dozen or more reasons to buy, and you’ll see your registration rate soar. Is it worth spending a day to do this? I think so.
I'm a big (neo)vim buff. My config is over 1500 lines and I regularly write new scripts. I recently ported my neovim config to a new laptop. Before then, I was using VSCode to write, and when I switched back I immediately saw a big gain in productivity. People often pooh-pooh vim (and other assistive writing technologies) by saying that writing code isn't the bottleneck in software development. Reading, understanding, and thinking through code is! Now I don't know how true this actually is in practice, because empirical studies of time spent coding are all over the place. Most of them, like this study, track time spent in the editor but don't distinguish between time spent reading code and time spent writing code. The only one I found that separates them was this study. It finds that developers spend only 5% of their time editing. It also finds they spend 14% of their time moving or resizing editor windows, so I don't know how clean their data is. But I have a bigger problem with "writing is not the bottleneck": when I think of a bottleneck, I imagine that no amount of improvement will lead to productivity gains. Like if a program is bottlenecked on the network, it isn't going to get noticeably faster with 100x more ram or compute. But being able to type code 100x faster, even with without corresponding improvements to reading and imagining code, would be huge. We'll assume the average developer writes at 80 words per minute, at five characters a word, for 400 characters a minute.What could we do if we instead wrote at 8,000 words/40k characters a minute? Writing fast Boilerplate is trivial Why do people like type inference? Because writing all of the types manually is annoying. Why don't people like boilerplate? Because it's annoying to write every damn time. Programmers like features that help them write less! That's not a problem if you can write all of the boilerplate in 0.1 seconds. You still have the problem of reading boilerplate heavy code, but you can use the remaining 0.9 seconds to churn out an extension that parses the file and presents the boilerplate in a more legible fashion. We can write more tooling This is something I've noticed with LLMs: when I can churn out crappy code as a free action, I use that to write lots of tools that assist me in writing good code. Even if I'm bottlenecked on a large program, I can still quickly write a script that helps me with something. Most of these aren't things I would have written because they'd take too long to write! Again, not the best comparison, because LLMs also shortcut learning the relevant APIs, so also optimize the "understanding code" part. Then again, if I could type real fast I could more quickly whip up experiments on new apis to learn them faster. We can do practices that slow us down in the short-term Something like test-driven development significantly slows down how fast you write production code, because you have to spend a lot more time writing test code. Pair programming trades speed of writing code for speed of understanding code. A two-order-of-magnitude writing speedup makes both of them effectively free. Or, if you're not an eXtreme Programming fan, you can more easily follow the The Power of Ten Rules and blanket your code with contracts and assertions. We could do more speculative editing This is probably the biggest difference in how we'd work if we could write 100x faster: it'd be much easier to try changes to the code to see if they're good ideas in the first place. How often have I tried optimizing something, only to find out it didn't make a difference? How often have I done a refactoring only to end up with lower-quality code overall? Too often. Over time it makes me prefer to try things that I know will work, and only "speculatively edit" when I think it be a fast change. If I could code 100x faster it would absolutely lead to me trying more speculative edits. This is especially big because I believe that lots of speculative edits are high-risk, high-reward: given 50 things we could do to the code, 49 won't make a difference and one will be a major improvement. If I only have time to try five things, I have a 10% chance of hitting the jackpot. If I can try 500 things I will get that reward every single time. Processes are built off constraints There are just a few ideas I came up with; there are probably others. Most of them, I suspect, will share the same property in common: they change the process of writing code to leverage the speedup. I can totally believe that a large speedup would not remove a bottleneck in the processes we currently use to write code. But that's because those processes are developed work within our existing constraints. Remove a constraint and new processes become possible. The way I see it, if our current process produces 1 Utils of Software / day, a 100x writing speedup might lead to only 1.5 UoS/day. But there are other processes that produce only 0.5 UoS/d because they are bottlenecked on writing speed. A 100x speedup would lead to 10 UoS/day. The problem with all of this that 100x speedup isn't realistic, and it's not obvious whether a 2x improvement would lead to better processes. Then again, one of the first custom vim function scripts I wrote was an aid to writing unit tests in a particular codebase, and it lead to me writing a lot more tests. So maybe even a 2x speedup is going to be speed things up, too. Patreon Stuff I wrote a couple of TLA+ specs to show how to model fork-join algorithms. I'm planning on eventually writing them up for my blog/learntla but it'll be a while, so if you want to see them in the meantime I put them up on Patreon.
Here’s Jony Ive in his Stripe interview: What we make stands testament to who we are. What we make describes our values. It describes our preoccupations. It describes beautiful succinctly our preoccupation. I’d never really noticed the connection between these two words: occupation and preoccupation. What comes before occupation? Pre-occupation. What comes before what you do for a living? What you think about. What you’re preoccupied with. What you think about will drive you towards what you work on. So when you’re asking yourself, “What comes next? What should I work on?” Another way of asking that question is, “What occupies my thinking right now?” And if what you’re occupied with doesn’t align with what you’re preoccupied with, perhaps it's time for a change. Email · Mastodon · Bluesky
There's no country on earth that does hype better than America. It's one of the most appealing aspects about being here. People are genuinely excited about the future and never stop searching for better ways to work, live, entertain, and profit. There's a unique critical mass in the US accelerating and celebrating tomorrow. The contrast to Europe couldn't be greater. Most Europeans are allergic to anything that even smells like a commercial promise of a better tomorrow. "Hype" is universally used as a term to ridicule anyone who dares to be excited about something new, something different. Only a fool would believe that real progress is possible! This is cultural bedrock. The fault lines have been settling for generations. It'll take an earthquake to move them. You see this in AI, you saw it in the Internet. Europeans are just as smart, just as inventive as their American brethren, but they don't do hype, so they're rarely the ones able to sell the sizzle that public opinion requires to shift its vision for tomorrow. To say I have a complicated relationship with venture capital is putting it mildly. I've spent a career proving the counter narrative. Proving that you can build and bootstrap an incredible business without investor money, still leave a dent in the universe, while enjoying the spoils of capitalism. And yet... I must admit that the excesses of venture capital are integral to this uniquely American advantage on hype. The lavish overspending during the dot-com boom led directly to a spectacular bust, but it also built the foundation of the internet we all enjoy today. Pets.com and Webvan flamed out such that Amazon and Shopify could transform ecommerce out of the ashes. We're in the thick of peak hype on AI right now. Fantastical sums are chasing AGI along with every dumb derivative mirage along the way. The most outrageous claims are being put forth on the daily. It's easy to look at that spectacle with European eyes and roll them. Some of it is pretty cringe! But I think that would be a mistake. You don't have to throw away your critical reasoning to accept that in the face of unknown potential, optimism beats pessimism. We all have to believe in something, and you're much better off believing that things can get better than not. Americans fundamentally believe this. They believe the hype, so they make it come to fruition. Not every time, not all of them, but more of them, more of the time than any other country in the world. That really is exceptional.
