Much value exists on the internet outside of the techcrunch echo chamber. Dismiss it at your own peril.
I agree, however, for simple answers I've had some very good luck on r/explainlikeimfive. If anyone here hasn't seen that subreddit I suggest taking a look at it. There are plenty of things that I had no idea about and someone can explain it very simply in a very short paragraph, compared to a wall of text that other places might provide (assuming I just want a simple answer).
Take this for example.
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ywh1y/eli...
Because they actually do their job and provide good answers a decent percentage of the time; and generally feel less spammy/scammy than most sites.
- high bounce rate
- 90%+ search engine traffic vs direct visits
(even though they buy traffic from other (cheap) sources)
- very low time spent on site
- very low returning visitors ratio
Their website design is quite pretty, yet the awful usability stats.Website called as "content farm" and poor usability stats, coincidence or..?
http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-money-the-new-...
Revenues for About.com have been steadily declining. It's not surprising that the NYT dumped it. I'm just surprised that there was a bidding war over it.
Here's their Ruby site: http://ruby.about.com/
Note: I can't say the quality of the technical writing is good. I'm just surprised they try to do so much at all, given the number of great technical blogs and free references out there (nevermind, ahem, Stack Overflow). It just goes to show that About.com's content strategy seems to be very lackadaisical
This will become the Viacom of the internet... Content without content?
Gotta remember that for every person who uses the web, there is someone who knows even less about it.
There is a niche for everyone. Literally.
[1] http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/27/technology/times-about/?hpt=...
[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/21/us-nyt-about-sale-...
[1] http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/viewer?action=view&cik=891103...