Secret Behind Technology Blogs
from web site
"Technology in the long-run is irrelevant". That is college thinks customer of mine laughed and said when I produced a demonstration to him about a cool product. I had been dealing with the product's features and benefits and listed "state-of-the-art technology" or something compared to that effect, as one of them. That is when he made his statement. I actually realized after that having been correct, at least within the framework of how We used "Technology" in my business presentation. But I actually began planning on whether he could be right in other contexts as well.
What is Technology?
Merriam-Webster specifies it such as:
1. a good: the practical application of knowledge specially in a particular region: engineering two
b: a potential given by the practical application of knowledge
a couple of : a manner of accomplishing a task especially using technical functions, methods, or perhaps knowledge
4 : the specialized aspects of a unique field in endeavor
Wikipedia becomes it as:
Technology (from Greek τÎχνη, techne, "art, skill, scheming of hand"; and -λογία, -logia[1]) may be the making, alteration, usage, and knowledge of equipment, machines, methods, crafts, devices, and ways of organization, to be able to solve problems, improve a preexisting answer to a problem, acquire a goal, control an applied input/output relationship or execute a specific labor. It can also make reference to the collection of such tools, including devices, modifications, arrangements and strategies. Technologies drastically affect human being as well as other creature species' power to control and adapt to all their natural situations. The term can be applied generally or to certain areas: for example construction technology, medical technology, and it.
Both definitions revolve around the same thing - app and application.
Technology is an enabler
Plenty of people mistakenly still find it technology which in turn drives innovation. Yet from your definitions above, that is obviously not the case. It truly is opportunity which usually defines technology and technology which helps innovation. Imagine the classic "Build a better mousetrap" example taught in most business schools. You have got the technology to build a mousetrap, but once you have simply no mice or the old mousetrap works well, you cannot find any opportunity and the technology to build a better one becomes irrelevant. On the flip side, if you are full of mice then a opportunity exists to innovate a product using your technology.
One other example, a person with which I actually is intimately familiar, are consumer electronics startup company companies. As a former associated with both those that prevailed and those that failed. Every possessed unique leading edge technological innovation. The difference is opportunity. The ones that failed could hardly find the chance to develop a meaningful innovation making use of their technology. Actually to survive, these businesses had to change oftentimes into something completely different and if these were lucky they could take advantage of derivatives of their initial technology. More often than not, the original technology wound up inside scrap stack. Technology, as a result, is an enabler whose quintessential value task is to can improve our lives. In order to be relevant, it takes to be utilized to create innovations that are driven by occasion.
Technology to be a competitive edge?
Many companies list a technology as one of their particular competitive rewards. Is this in force? In some cases certainly, but In most all cases no .
Technology develops down two trails - a great evolutionary route and a revolutionary path.
New technology the which makes it possible for new companies or enables solutions to issues that were before not possible. Semiconductor technology is a great example. Not only did it breed new market sectors and merchandise, but it created other innovative technologies supports transistor technology, integrated rounds technology, processor technology. All of the which furnish many of the goods and services we take today. Nevertheless is semiconductor technology some competitive edge? Looking at the amount of semiconductor firms that exist at this time (with different ones forming every day), I'd express not. Think about microprocessor technology? Again, no . Lots of processor companies to choose from. How about quad core microprocessor technology? Quite a bit less many companies, and you have Intel, AMD, ARM, and a host of companies generating custom quad core processors (Apple, The samsung company, Qualcomm, etc). So once again, thecitrusreport.com of a competitive edge. Competition by competing technologies and easy entry to IP minimizes the perceived competitive benefit of any particular technology. Android vs iOS is a good example of how this kind of works. Both equally operating systems are derivatives from UNIX. Apple used their technology to introduce iOS and gained an early industry advantage. Nonetheless Google, utilizing their variant in Unix (a competing technology), caught up fairly quickly. The grounds for this are located not from the underlying technology, but in the way the products made possible by those technologies were brought to current market (free or walled garden, etc . ) and the variations in the proper visions of each and every company.
Evolutionary technology is one which incrementally builds about the base ground-breaking technology. Although by it is quite nature, the incremental switch is easier to get a competitor to complement or leapfrog. Take for example wireless cellphone technology. Company V introduced 4-G products just before Company An important and while this could have had a shorter term benefits, as soon as Business A presented their 4-G products, the power due to technology disappeared. The individual went back to selecting Company A good or Provider V based on price, program, coverage, whatsoever, but not based on technology. So technology might have been relevant for a while, but in the long term, became less relevant.
In today's world, systems tend to quickly become commoditized, and within any kind of particular technology lies the seeds from its own fatality.
Technology's Benefits
This article was written from the prospective of any end customer. Via a developer/designer standpoint stuff get murkier. The even more one is removed from the technology, the significantly less relevant it is. To a developer, the technology can look being a product. A great enabling merchandise, but a product non-etheless, and therefore it is exceptionally relevant. Bose uses a exclusive signal finalizing technology to enable products the fact that meet a set of market desires and thus the technology and what it helps is relevant to them. Their customers are more worried about how this might sound, what's the cost, what's the coffee quality, etc ., and not so much with how it will be achieved, as a result the technology used is really a lot less relevant to them.
Not too long ago, I was associated with a discussion with Google+ about the new Motorola X mobile. A lot of the persons on the ones posts criticized the phone intended for various explanations - selling price, locked footwear loader, and so forth There were even plenty of knocks on the fact who's didn't have a very good quad-core processor like the S4 or THE NEW HTC One which are priced in the same way. What they failed to grasp is the fact whether the company used one particular, 2, 5, or eight cores ultimately makes not any difference so long as the phone may deliver a competitively priced (or actually best of class) feature arranged, functionality, value, and buyer experience. The iPhone is amongst the most outstanding phones possibly produced, but it operates on a dual-core processor. It however delivers one of the better user experience on the market. The features that are facilitated by the technology are what exactly relevant to the buyer, not the technology themselves.
The benefits of technology therefore , can be as an enabler, not as a solution feature or simply a competitive gain, or any myriad of other things -- an enabler. Looking at the Android main system, it is an impressive piece of software technology, and yet Yahoo gives it away. Why? As standalone, it does nothing for Google. Giving it away permits other companies to apply their experience to build goods and services which then act as enablers to get Google's services and products. To Google and bing, that's where real benefits is.
The possession of as well as access to a technology is simply important for what enables you to carry out - develop innovations which will solve complications. That is the actual relevance from technology.
What is Technology?
Merriam-Webster specifies it such as:
1. a good: the practical application of knowledge specially in a particular region: engineering two
b: a potential given by the practical application of knowledge
a couple of : a manner of accomplishing a task especially using technical functions, methods, or perhaps knowledge
4 : the specialized aspects of a unique field in endeavor
Wikipedia becomes it as:
Technology (from Greek τÎχνη, techne, "art, skill, scheming of hand"; and -λογία, -logia[1]) may be the making, alteration, usage, and knowledge of equipment, machines, methods, crafts, devices, and ways of organization, to be able to solve problems, improve a preexisting answer to a problem, acquire a goal, control an applied input/output relationship or execute a specific labor. It can also make reference to the collection of such tools, including devices, modifications, arrangements and strategies. Technologies drastically affect human being as well as other creature species' power to control and adapt to all their natural situations. The term can be applied generally or to certain areas: for example construction technology, medical technology, and it.
Both definitions revolve around the same thing - app and application.
Technology is an enabler
Plenty of people mistakenly still find it technology which in turn drives innovation. Yet from your definitions above, that is obviously not the case. It truly is opportunity which usually defines technology and technology which helps innovation. Imagine the classic "Build a better mousetrap" example taught in most business schools. You have got the technology to build a mousetrap, but once you have simply no mice or the old mousetrap works well, you cannot find any opportunity and the technology to build a better one becomes irrelevant. On the flip side, if you are full of mice then a opportunity exists to innovate a product using your technology.
One other example, a person with which I actually is intimately familiar, are consumer electronics startup company companies. As a former associated with both those that prevailed and those that failed. Every possessed unique leading edge technological innovation. The difference is opportunity. The ones that failed could hardly find the chance to develop a meaningful innovation making use of their technology. Actually to survive, these businesses had to change oftentimes into something completely different and if these were lucky they could take advantage of derivatives of their initial technology. More often than not, the original technology wound up inside scrap stack. Technology, as a result, is an enabler whose quintessential value task is to can improve our lives. In order to be relevant, it takes to be utilized to create innovations that are driven by occasion.
Technology to be a competitive edge?
Many companies list a technology as one of their particular competitive rewards. Is this in force? In some cases certainly, but In most all cases no .
Technology develops down two trails - a great evolutionary route and a revolutionary path.
New technology the which makes it possible for new companies or enables solutions to issues that were before not possible. Semiconductor technology is a great example. Not only did it breed new market sectors and merchandise, but it created other innovative technologies supports transistor technology, integrated rounds technology, processor technology. All of the which furnish many of the goods and services we take today. Nevertheless is semiconductor technology some competitive edge? Looking at the amount of semiconductor firms that exist at this time (with different ones forming every day), I'd express not. Think about microprocessor technology? Again, no . Lots of processor companies to choose from. How about quad core microprocessor technology? Quite a bit less many companies, and you have Intel, AMD, ARM, and a host of companies generating custom quad core processors (Apple, The samsung company, Qualcomm, etc). So once again, thecitrusreport.com of a competitive edge. Competition by competing technologies and easy entry to IP minimizes the perceived competitive benefit of any particular technology. Android vs iOS is a good example of how this kind of works. Both equally operating systems are derivatives from UNIX. Apple used their technology to introduce iOS and gained an early industry advantage. Nonetheless Google, utilizing their variant in Unix (a competing technology), caught up fairly quickly. The grounds for this are located not from the underlying technology, but in the way the products made possible by those technologies were brought to current market (free or walled garden, etc . ) and the variations in the proper visions of each and every company.
Evolutionary technology is one which incrementally builds about the base ground-breaking technology. Although by it is quite nature, the incremental switch is easier to get a competitor to complement or leapfrog. Take for example wireless cellphone technology. Company V introduced 4-G products just before Company An important and while this could have had a shorter term benefits, as soon as Business A presented their 4-G products, the power due to technology disappeared. The individual went back to selecting Company A good or Provider V based on price, program, coverage, whatsoever, but not based on technology. So technology might have been relevant for a while, but in the long term, became less relevant.
In today's world, systems tend to quickly become commoditized, and within any kind of particular technology lies the seeds from its own fatality.
Technology's Benefits
This article was written from the prospective of any end customer. Via a developer/designer standpoint stuff get murkier. The even more one is removed from the technology, the significantly less relevant it is. To a developer, the technology can look being a product. A great enabling merchandise, but a product non-etheless, and therefore it is exceptionally relevant. Bose uses a exclusive signal finalizing technology to enable products the fact that meet a set of market desires and thus the technology and what it helps is relevant to them. Their customers are more worried about how this might sound, what's the cost, what's the coffee quality, etc ., and not so much with how it will be achieved, as a result the technology used is really a lot less relevant to them.
Not too long ago, I was associated with a discussion with Google+ about the new Motorola X mobile. A lot of the persons on the ones posts criticized the phone intended for various explanations - selling price, locked footwear loader, and so forth There were even plenty of knocks on the fact who's didn't have a very good quad-core processor like the S4 or THE NEW HTC One which are priced in the same way. What they failed to grasp is the fact whether the company used one particular, 2, 5, or eight cores ultimately makes not any difference so long as the phone may deliver a competitively priced (or actually best of class) feature arranged, functionality, value, and buyer experience. The iPhone is amongst the most outstanding phones possibly produced, but it operates on a dual-core processor. It however delivers one of the better user experience on the market. The features that are facilitated by the technology are what exactly relevant to the buyer, not the technology themselves.
The benefits of technology therefore , can be as an enabler, not as a solution feature or simply a competitive gain, or any myriad of other things -- an enabler. Looking at the Android main system, it is an impressive piece of software technology, and yet Yahoo gives it away. Why? As standalone, it does nothing for Google. Giving it away permits other companies to apply their experience to build goods and services which then act as enablers to get Google's services and products. To Google and bing, that's where real benefits is.
The possession of as well as access to a technology is simply important for what enables you to carry out - develop innovations which will solve complications. That is the actual relevance from technology.
