SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Mike Buckley who wrote (44004)7/1/2001 12:33:21 PM
From: Eric L  Read Replies (1) of 54805
 
--Mike

<< Regarding Christensen's "closed" architecture ... In other words, they didn't develop a standard, did not develop to a standard, and did not wait around for a standard to be developed ... The same could be said of an "open" architecture using Moore's definition. >>

Well, I guess maybe so.

Clayton deals with the issue of developing proprietary architecture before standardization (which makes it proprietary "closed" at that juncture), but if we were applying Moore's "open" architecture definition, and applying Moore's tactics literally we probably would not be investing in a company at that juncture. We would at least have to see that the proprietary architecture had a fair chance to evolve to "open" architecture, which implies standardization (or at least open documentation and dissemination of same) de facto or de jure.

But perhaps you have further thoughts on this and would like to elaborate?

<< Until I learn how Christensen distinguishes between his concept of an open and closed standard, I don't think I truly understand his concept of either. >>

Do you have a game plan for learning this?

Semester at Harvard B School? <g>

Now that's my short response. Stay tuned .....

Eric--
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext