Comments on: Take that Apple http://nicolaiwadstrom.com/blog/2007/10/18/take-that-apple/ A Swedish/European Entrepreneur in Silicon Valley Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:20:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Christian Rudolf http://nicolaiwadstrom.com/blog/2007/10/18/take-that-apple/comment-page-1/#comment-926 Christian Rudolf Sun, 28 Oct 2007 16:37:44 +0000 http://www.wadstrom.net/2007/10/18/take-that-apple/#comment-926 I agree on most of the content of this post but I also feel it misses one important factor, the customer! The entrepenour has to be very customer orientated to be able to build his service/product. Primarily with customer money, not his own or VC money! I belive it could be very harmfoul for a company to get funding on the idealevel. In many cases this is just a wast of money. When you have a customer, you do not just get to send invoices. You get very valuable information on how the customer thinks, acts and the market. This infomation is cruicial and I belive a necessity to get any furhter funding! A market survey is just not good enough! I agree on most of the content of this post but I also feel it misses one important factor, the customer!

The entrepenour has to be very customer orientated to be able to build his service/product. Primarily with customer money, not his own or VC money!

I belive it could be very harmfoul for a company to get funding on the idealevel. In many cases this is just a wast of money. When you have a customer, you do not just get to send invoices. You get very valuable information on how the customer thinks, acts and the market. This infomation is cruicial and I belive a necessity to get any furhter funding! A market survey is just not good enough!

]]> By: Nicolai Wadstrom http://nicolaiwadstrom.com/blog/2007/10/18/take-that-apple/comment-page-1/#comment-894 Nicolai Wadstrom Sat, 20 Oct 2007 12:27:09 +0000 http://www.wadstrom.net/2007/10/18/take-that-apple/#comment-894 Look at Microsoft's website for "Microsoft surface", most of this reminds me of a Sun project that I saw 9-10 years ago. So seems Microsoft is doing what they always do, they take innovations and package it for a new target group. Which <a href="http://www.wadstrom.net/2007/10/20/what-is-entrepreneurship-all-about/" rel="nofollow"> is not bad per see I think</a>, but Microsoft tends to do it "just good enough" and others are better at it such as Apple. There are others that made tremendous innovations in User Interface paradigms, but the innovators are not the one making the big bucks. One example is the common mis belief that Microsoft stole the UI paradigm from Apple with Windows 95. The concepts for the Windows 95 and subsequent UI's are based IBM patents (CUA 91), that Microsoft paid royalties to use. The best implementation of the CUA 91 was the IBM Workplace Shell (OS/2), which in some UI concepts and innovations still are "years" ahead of Windows and Mac OS X, but IBM was really bad at packing those innovations for a market and bringing them to that market, something Microsoft excelled in and Apple did better than IBM (but not as good as Microsoft until Jobs came back). Admittedly the CUA 91 work at IBM was a lead by a female researcher that used to work for Apple (her name slips my mind...) Look at Microsoft’s website for “Microsoft surface”, most of this reminds me of a Sun project that I saw 9-10 years ago. So seems Microsoft is doing what they always do, they take innovations and package it for a new target group. Which
is not bad per see I think, but Microsoft tends to do it “just good enough” and others are better at it such as Apple. There are others that made tremendous innovations in User Interface paradigms, but the innovators are not the one making the big bucks. One example is the common mis belief that Microsoft stole the UI paradigm from Apple with Windows 95. The concepts for the Windows 95 and subsequent UI’s are based IBM patents (CUA 91), that Microsoft paid royalties to use. The best implementation of the CUA 91 was the IBM Workplace Shell (OS/2), which in some UI concepts and innovations still are “years” ahead of Windows and Mac OS X, but IBM was really bad at packing those innovations for a market and bringing them to that market, something Microsoft excelled in and Apple did better than IBM (but not as good as Microsoft until Jobs came back).

Admittedly the CUA 91 work at IBM was a lead by a female researcher that used to work for Apple (her name slips my mind…)

]]>