4 ms·
> Money? That's harder, unfortunately. It's hard to innovate when people want to cling on to what they already know. This is a core element of my questions tha
by nkobeissi 10y ago
> Money? That's harder, unfortunately. It's hard to innovate when people want to cling on to what they already know.
This is a core element of my questions that other answers are unfortunately not addressing. Even if you make software that's less clunky than legacy-grade Adobe Kamatsu-tractor like offerings, how do you make make switching lucrative to the point of achieving self-sustainability?
- jdgiese 10y agoI definitely agree that people are slow to switch from what they know, but I don't think it is impossible to build software that will make people jump ship on the old stuff. Take Sketch for example (http://www.sketchapp.com http://www.sketchapp.com). Everyone on our team used to use Adobe Illustrator, and now everyone uses Sketch instead, because for what we do, it is simpler and better.
- scalio 10y agoGood example, I think it is easier to dislodge old tractors with tools built for one specific thing, i.e. that do less, but do it so much simpler that they're just a joy to use (at least in comparison).
- tonyedgecombe 10y agoI've often though a good strategy would be to look at some incumbent (Quickbooks, Photshop, etc) then choose a subset of their customers (Landlords, Real estate agents, etc) you can target more effectively than they can.
- knikravesh 10y agoDo you think that in this particular case (Illustrator vs Sketch), the fact that Adobe employed a subscription model sped up the process of people being a bit uncomfortable and looking for alternative solutions?