Hacker News Reader

Comment by Animats | Hacker News Reader

What he refers to as "technology" companies are not ones innovating in any technological area. He's really talking about online application business-to-consumer startups ("appcrap"), for which there's a well-defined assembly line process. A real technology company is defined by their ability to do something hard that others have trouble doing.

The first mover has an advantage, but it's not overwhelming. IBM didn't come out with the first personal computer - Apple and Commodore did. Microsoft didn't have the first operating system for x86 machines - Digital Research did. AOL once dominated social networking. Facebook moved into a quite mature space - Myspace, Geocities, and several others were big companies when Facebook started.

Luck does indeed play a big part. If Gary Kildall, the author of CP/M, had been in the office the day IBM was looking for an OS for their new PC, the history of personal computing could have been very different.

View on HN

> IBM didn't come out with the first personal computer - Apple and Commodore did.

IBM wasn't a startup -- it had massive distribution resources. When you have access to an enormous distribution channel and massive marketing budgets, the rules are obviously different.

> Microsoft didn't have the first operating system for x86 machines - Digital Research did.

Yes, but Microsoft piggybacked off of IBM's distribution channel. That's extremely rare, and 99.99% of startups can't swing that sort of deal.

> AOL once dominated social networking. Facebook moved into a quite mature space - Myspace, Geocities, and several others were big companies when Facebook started.

AOL, MySpace, and Geocities effectively committed suicide. It's nice when that happens, but you can't count on it.

There are no guarantees, it's all a balance of probabilities. The point isn't that the first mover always wins, it's that if you aren't the first mover the balance of probabilities is against you.

>AOL, MySpace, and Geocities effectively committed suicide.

Can you further explain this?

First movers don't always win.

http://staffweb.ncnu.edu.tw/clhung/MOT/Mohr02.ppt (slide 19 and on)

First movers have an advantage when they can raise entry barriers (economies of scale, network effects, switching costs).

However, fast followers or late movers have some important advantages, and if the early movers don't have significant barriers they can pull the rug from under them if they have a superior product or better business model.

>>> He's really talking about online application business-to-consumer startups ("appcrap")

No, I don't think so. The author is Slava from RethinkDB. His company is definitely not "appcrap" (as you put it), and I think his same line of reasoning applies equally well to "real technology" companies (like RethinkDB), it just takes place on a longer time horizon. If you extend his metaphors to include the time to competitively create "real technology" they apply equally well.

Exactly right. If Google can make self-driving cars, there are at least two other companies in the world (and probably many more) that can (and will) make competing self-driving cars. The timeline is a big longer, but the basic rules are the same.

As much as we all like to think we're exceptional, we aren't.

FYI, rethinkdb.com is down.

It seems accessible to me.

It's back now, indeed.

On the note of self-driving cars, check out http://www.getcruise.com/

I just heard of them from a friend who will be joining and I was skeptical at first. Their model seems to be to attach/install peripherals to a non- self-driving car and turn it into a self driving car. That way they can compete on a level with Google (optimistically) but don't need to manufacture vehicles.

"A real technology company is defined by their ability to do something hard that others have trouble doing."

You're right. But of those companies that just "use" high tech for their services start to put efforts in R&D to stay on top later in their game.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com