Skip to main content

Introducing Dadnab

I have been working on my own venture for about year. In the middle of 2006, I began recruiting beta testers for the new service. The service is now out of beta.

Dadnab enables riders of mass transit (bus, rail, etc.) to plan their trips using text messaging from their mobile phones. A rider sends a text message with her origin and destination, and Dadnab replies to the message with an itinerary telling which buses or trains to take, at which stops, and at what times.

The service is currently available in Austin, Boston, Dallas, and Houston, with many more cities in the works.

Below is a demo, in the form of a web widget, of the +Dadnab service:





Try Dadnab now.

Comments and suggestions about the service are welcome. Please feel free to try it from your mobile phone (see the web site for instructions), and don't hesitate to spread the word.

UPDATE: To learn how to include the Dadnab widget on your blog or other web page, see my next entry.
UPDATE: Chicago Dadnab is now operational.
UPDATE: Seattle Dadnab is now operational.
UPDATE: Tri-State Dadnab is now operational. It covers New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut.
UPDATE: Bay Area Dadnab is now operational. It covers the San Francisco Bay Area.
UPDATE: Portland Dadnab is now operational.
UPDATE: Southern California Dadnab is now operational.

Comments

Jeff Key said…
Bravo! Please include Chicago, as we have a very healthy public transit ridership. (Can't always say the same about the service, but we're used to it.)
rcauvin said…
Thanks, Jeff. Your timing is impeccable, as Chicago is the next city that Dadnab will support. Look for it to be available before February.
tmycann said…
Any thoughts on Washington, DC or Milwaukee joining the list of cities any time soon?
Roger L. Cauvin said…
Washington, DC is in the plans but as of yet there is no projected date.

Popular posts from this blog

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri  makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Use Case as a Black Box

Consider the following use case: Purchase Items Actor: Purchaser Precondition: Purchaser types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40. Postcondition: For the average Purchaser acting at full efficiency, the number of seconds elapsed is no more than 30 + 20 * n, where n is the number of items purchased. The name of the use case represents a functional requirement. What does the product do, or enable the user to do? Purchase items. What are we to make of the preconditions and postconditions? What relationship do they have to the requirements for the product? Answer: the preconditions and postconditions are the nonfunctional requirements attached to the functional requirement . Another way of expressing the nonfunctional requirement would be as an attribute and associated constraint: Usability: For a Purchaser who types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40, it shall take no

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the