|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
How's this for an inovative concept. Take this thread off forum!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Calandra Sikes" <jen450us@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 8:35 PM
Subject: Product innovation vs Concept innovation -- MSFT innovates
> You know, I think y'all confuse concept innovation
> with product innovation. It's really really hard and
> really really expensive and extrememely time consuming
> to invent concepts -- create them, draft them for
> others, develop them, test them and bring them into
> production -- let alone creating a final user version
> and marketing it. Concept innovation (inventing) is
> what IBM does in their raw research labs. That's
> EXTREME risk. Who wants that?
>
> The other type of innovation is product innovation.
> Where they modify an old (not widely distributed)
> idea, modernize it, design it, build it (with their
> own engineers -- not stealing some else's design
> verbatim), or code it (and each line of MSFT code is
> original! thus innovative) and then user test it,
> market it and release it. That's innovation because
> it brings something that didn't exist in the
> mainstream markets -- computer basements in AI labs
> don't count sorry -- to market for the public. MFC is
> a good example in a long list of good examples of an
> innovative product.
>
> Taking what you think is a good idea, changing it a
> little and then popularizing it is a good way to do
> business. Anyway, how many truly original ideas are
> there out there? Not many. In fact, most of what is
> considered new from any company, it really not. That
> goes for reserarch ideas, product ideas you name it.
> Probably only about 3% of the so called new ideas and
> products out there are truly original.
>
> I can't blame MSFT or any other company for not
> wanting to develop truly original ideas because it's
> so risky. It's a good way to go out of business fast.
>
> Gates methodology the way I see is to buy a higher
> bottom. He waits for the market to tip it's hand --
> shows there demand -- and then buys like mad. In that
> respect he a dman good trader and who can fault him
> for that?
>
> Unless y'all have made a living (forget living, just
> some $$$) buying falling knives, I don't think anyone
> on this list can fault him.
>
> So y'all should just si'down, buy some of his stock,
> and quit fighting it.
>
> Jen.
>
> On Tuesday, November 26, 2002, 9:34:48 AM, Calandra
> Sikes wrote:
>
> CS> Toolbars, accelerator keys, context sensitive
> menus, Help buttons
> CS> on the dialogs, scroll wheels, and I think even 2
> button mouses
> CS> (Apples was 1 button) those are all MSFT
> innovations that probably
> CS> came out of usability studies.
>
> Ummm... you might want to check back in some early CS
> and AI research
> labs - you'd be surprised by what you'd find there.
> For example, I was
> using a 3-button mouse before M$ had Windows, and they
> activated early
> versions of the above, and more. M$ wanted a
> dumbed-down version, thus
> 2 buttons.
>
> CS> Microsoft does innvoate but you have to be willing
> and able to see
> CS> it.
>
> I keep trying to find it, but it always seems they
> copied it instead.
> Their PR division does the innovating. :-) And many
> clueless people
> swallow it - hook, line, and sinker.
>
> CS> The split keyboards are also an idea MSFT
> popularized
>
> True
>
> CS> not invented.
>
> Also true. :-)
>
> CS> I could go on and on.
>
> Likewise.
>
> CS> That?s the way it is with MSFT haters. They nit
> pick the products
> CS> to death -- the 10% that has flaws
>
> CS> MSFT does not write mediocre software. On the
> CS> contrary, they set the industry standard. I know
> CS> because I?ve been using MSFT software since 1985
> when
> CS> my Dad brought home Excel and Word.
>
> I've been following it since Gates had his first
> version of Basic
> distributed on paper tape. Everything they released
> was soooooo bad I
> developed a rule to not buy anything from M$ until
> version 3.3. So did
> many others. M$ finally caught on to this and quit
> using the version
> numbering. :-)
>
> CS> And as for your hatered of MSFT because because
> ?Gates wants to
> CS> control (and presumably charge me for) every
> packet of data that
> CS> comes into?
>
> He's a lot more greedy than that. :-))
>
> ztrader
>
|