Thank you for the articles, I had a problem linking to the first one, but was able to read the second one. (NC World magazine). Interesting article. The problem with finding window's of opportunity is that, by the time the press sees them and acknowledges it and/or writes about it, it is already 6 months to a year past. They are correct in that they can have another kick at the cat (figure of speech, and apologies to cat owners). The problem is that they missed a really big opportunity here. The kind of opportunity that Microsoft was successful, lucky and aggressive enough to open with the MS DOS and the PC era and become the powerhouse that they are.
The author did point out the difference between IBM's Watson, SUN's McNealy, Oracle's Ellison and Bill Gates. Gates is aggressive and decisive when it comes to attacking a market (just witness Microsoft's attack on the Internet with MSN, IE, and now on Java).
IBM is a large,monolithic and slow moving company. They are too slow to capitalise on new trends and exploit them to their fullest. Gates has somehow been able to build a relatively large company (not the size of an IBM)and build it in such a way that it can respond to market trends. Typically, large companies do not set trends. The new technologies are spawned from smaller start-ups (usually closely associated with the Universities). It is really hard for companies to stay innovative when they grow, Microsoft is no exception. But they have done a better job at changing with the trends and quickly catching up.
DIGRESS....
You hear a lot of people complaining about Microsoft's lack of innovation. I must admit that I do agree with them on this point, to an extent. Would you be willing to drive the latest cars (i.e. before they have been fully tested), knowing that your car may spontaneously 're-boot' itself while you are driving down the highway at 120kph. I think not. Whether a car reboots 2 times a day, a week or a year isn't that important, it is the time at which it reboots. The result is the same, you die.
BACK ON TOPIC...
Although the NC World Magazine author is correct in that they have a chance for capitalizing on another window of opportunity, it is quickly fading and the impact of the opportunity is waning. You typically have three valuable window's of opportunity in a market.
The first window, is for the early adopters. The small startups that build, shape and mold the market, if they survive the changes ahead, these startups can become very influential. Many startups crash-and-burn. Those that survive create more than a few millionaires. (read Microsoft(O/S field), Apple(Mac), Commodore (Amiga), Netscape, COGNOS (in the BI product market) and Oracle in the relational DB market).
The second window is the first chance for the larger companies to enter the market place. If they acknowledge the new market place early enough and enter in this window, they can quickly dominate it with their sheer weight and force ($$$$$). If few major corporations get involved, then the startups will be allowed to grow and become deeply entrenched. (read COGNOS, Oracle and Microsoft (in the O/S field)). Netscape didn't quite make it out of this one unscathed. Microsoft was able to attack their market in this phase and hurt them big-time. If the big guys enter the market at this stage then the PRESS starts to pick up on it (starts in trade magazines first), otherwise, they don't pick it up until the third window of opportunity).
In the third window of opportunity, the market is well established, the startups, if any are remaining, are pretty big now, and start to enter the 'mini-big corp' field. This is where the startups start faltering with their original owners. Very few startup owners are able to successfully manage their company through this stage. Bill Gates is one of them. The jury is still out on Larry Ellison. Watson was definitely one of these individuals (if you include his son who was able to continue on the father's success).
I believe, as do many of the people on this thread, that Corel has reached this stage, and that many are in the belief that Dr. Cowpland is not capable of leading the company through these waters. Mike Potter, owner of COGNOS, decided that his interests, and his best skills, lie with nurturing small startups into uncharted markets. I think Dr. Cowpland would also excel in this arena.
After the third window has passed, or during this window if the Corp has not entered into the market, the only recourse for the big-guns is to buy into the market (IBM buying Lotus, the next owner of Netscape, etc...).
The problem with the NC market is that they have missed the second window of opportunity (last year) and are looking at their third and final chance. If they do not act swiftly and decisively, the market will quickly fade away.
Ciao!
Jim Shaw |
