Personally I question what a "paradigm shift" would be considered to be.  I 
would then look at that is being proposed as such a thing.  Most of the truly 
accurate "futurist" were not associated with a company selling hardware or 
software.  They were academics and entertainers.  Look at what Rodenberry saw 
when he invented Star Trek.... (Yeah I know maybe not a good choice but he did 
see things in his vision that we now have maybe due to that vision) He was 
looking not at what was or what was possible but what he saw as the future.  
Like many others of his ink he was able to see true "paradigm shifts" even if 
he was not going to be a part of inventing them.  In my mind Jobs is and will 
forever be the king of salesmanship.  He convinced people that what he was 
selling was better, faster, more cool, than anything in the market, despite the 
fact that others had made it before him.  He was also not above allowing others 
to make claims that were patently false (Apple OS/iOS can't get bugs).  Later 
once he had his market up and running when he knew his time on that statement 
was running out made sure his marketing people did not make that claim but 
would quietly say it was possible for it to get bugs.  Google would not be in 
business except for companies like Microsoft and Yahoo.  Microsoft itself was 
only able to get going due to the inventor of an earlier OS not really being 
interested in business, well that and having family in the right place at the 
right time. A paradigm shift would be something everyone could benefit from or 
helps those in special niche markets get equal to those in the larger market.  
If Google glass were to be able to allow the blind to see then that to me would 
be a paradigm shift. Jon From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Color me skeptical
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:03:33 +0000









I’d argue that Google’s way of searching was/is sufficiently different to the 
competition (Alta Vista anyone) to be considered some
 kind of shift.
 
If you’re going to say that Google didn’t revolutionise search because they 
didn’t invent it, then arguably there’s been nothing
 revolutionised for hundreds of years (which I think we both agree is false). 
It may be just that we disagree on the degree of change required to call 
something a ‘paradigm shift’, but I’d argue that Google Search, and the concept 
of giving people “gigabytes”
 of “free” storage for Gmail were both game changers that propelled those two 
products from challengers to dominance.
 
Cheers
Ken
 
From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:[email protected]]


Sent: Tuesday, 23 April 2013 3:17 AM

To: NT System Admin Issues

Subject: Re: Color me skeptical
 


>>  They hit paydirt with "search, don't sort" and "sell user data/advertising 
>> to others, not services
 to users". 


 


But that wasn't a paradigm shift.  They didn't invent search, and they didn't 
invent selling advertising, and they didn't invent the freemium concept or the 
concept where the user is the
 product.


 




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~

        ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

        

        ---

        To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/

        or send an email to [email protected]

        with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin                                   
  
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to [email protected]
with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin

Reply via email to