[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
- From: "Dan Mabbutt" <Seigfried@msn.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 10:32:56 -0600
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <001701c1ceab$bcd35320$db95fea9@winme>
I'm REALLY late on this thread (I tend to catch up thread by thread when I
have time) but I have the advantage of having read the entire thread at
once.
>>6. I claim that hitting an 80/20 point is a strong predictor of
>>success (positive and also negative in that technologies that don't
>>hit it usually don't succeed), that there are a few less strong
>>predictors (happy programmers, good early implementations, technical
>>elegance), and that military backing is a weakish negative
>>indicators.
>>I had hoped that people would hit on some of these points.
>>Are there any technologies that DID hit a clear 80/20 point
>>that lost out in the marketplace to more complex competitors (
>>that weren't already entrenched)?
Why didn't anybody mention Adobe's Photoshop and Premier? They're both
famous for their complexity and impenetrable interface, and they both
dominate their respective niches. Photoshop, in particular, defeated some
very significant opposition. Only Paintshop Pro seems to be still hanging in
there ... and it sells to a completely different price/performance need.
Dan Mabbutt
|
