Someone on GetAFreelancer is willing to pay $100-$300 for a "DVD rental site based on the Netflix Model." Didn't Netflix spend millions and more than 7 years to develop the software?
« Reed Hastings in Virgin Commercial | Main | Lisa Loeb to Host Netflix Rolling Roadshow »
The comments to this entry are closed.
The contents of this Web site are (c) 2003 - 2013 Briki Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
The amazing part is all the guys saying "oh yeah, no problem"
Of course these guys will say anything (all the responses are obviously form letters) to get their foot in the door, then you can jack of prices after the fact.
Posted by: mimyc | June 28, 2006 at 11:08 AM
One guy can even to it in 1 day!
Posted by: noe638 | June 28, 2006 at 12:17 PM
The fairness algorithm will be the tricky devlopment effort.
Posted by: noe638 | June 28, 2006 at 12:18 PM
Of course web development is more than just writing code: it needs to be thought through and planned from marketing and strategy to user experience and information design; it needs to be information architected, tested, and tweaked. Netflix has done all the work; copying it is easy.
Posted by: usermonster | June 28, 2006 at 12:24 PM
85% of the projects listed on that and other similar sites are pretty much the same. They're all trying to clone EBay, Amazon, Yahoo, Flickr, Friendster, etc. for less than $500. That would go away except for the fact that every one of those projects gets dozens of people claiming to do it.
Posted by: LetterJ | June 28, 2006 at 12:25 PM
The fairness algorithm will be the tricky devlopment effort.
Posted by: noe638 | June 28, 2006 at 01:07 PM
Why did you have to post that again, an hour later? The fairness algorithm is easy. Just set the software so it only allows a certain number of "turns" each week or month. It is very simple. Then you continue to say you're giving "unlimited" rentals, "all you want", "new DVDs as fast as you can return them..."
Posted by: NetflixShill | June 28, 2006 at 09:51 PM
Sorry about the double post...not sure how that happened. I had the page up for awhile and hit the back button, but I definitely did not hit post again!
Posted by: noe638 | June 28, 2006 at 11:29 PM
Maybe Mike can get someone from GetaFreelancer to look into that!
Posted by: noe638 | June 28, 2006 at 11:30 PM
I just recreated the problem. In Mozilla, I hit Post and it sends the message. Then I hit the back button to go back to the message that contains my post in the comments section. Then, when I hit the Forward button in the browser, I get a message that says it contains post data or something of the like and it posts the message again.
I don't think it should post it again under that scenario, but I won't do it again.
Posted by: noe638 | June 28, 2006 at 11:34 PM
Doesn't it prompt you to re-submit the post data? I think Firefox does. I use Firefox or Mozilla most of the time.
Posted by: NetflixShill | June 29, 2006 at 02:38 PM
It does...but I wasn't aware what post data was. I guess I thought it was some kind of html term. Does it simply mean the information in the post a comment section?
I would expect that I would have click on the Post button to post it again.
Posted by: noe638 | June 29, 2006 at 05:10 PM
Post data is anything that your browser sent the last time you loaded a page, I think. If you submit a form and go back to the page it will prompt you to submit that again. It can be used for search results on certain sites, like DVD Verdict. If you try to reload your search results, it will ask you to re-submit the post data. Otherwise, it can't tell what you were searching for. It's not in the URL. In that case, you want to submit it, but not for comments on forms.
Posted by: NetflixShill | June 29, 2006 at 09:35 PM
Post-data is previous data, not necessarily something you posted. It can be any type of data passed by your browser to the site you are using. Some sites use post-data. Others don't. It would be good if the browser gave more detail about what this meant or showed you what was going to be sent.
Posted by: NetflixShill | June 29, 2006 at 09:54 PM