7 ms·

I think its silly to call "anything with an app" a tech company. For instance, uber is a transportation company, not a tech company. They may have been conside

by cptaj 7y ago

I think its silly to call "anything with an app" a tech company. For instance, uber is a transportation company, not a tech company. They may have been considered tech when they were developing self-driving cars but I think that was abandoned for now? Anyway, the point is that being in the internet and having an app is par for the course of any industry today. You're not on the brave frontier of tech anymore, you're just using existing tech to implement your business model. If you're making NEW tech, you're a tech company.

sjs7007 7y ago
Discounting Uber as just an app would be silly too. The scale they have to deal with is probably one of the world's biggest and they do contribute back too open source aka making new tech.
basch 7y ago
Everyone seems to be equating tech to mean circuits, runs on electricity, or computer code. Thats not what technology means. Tech is getting throw around because its hard to categorize some companies. Technology is "the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry." People tend to confuse tech and tools. The lever is a tool. Using a lever to create leverage, is technology. (You can argue that the lever is technology too, in that its applied knowledge of smelting, but that misses the point.) Uber is the application of engineering talent to automate taxi dispatch. Netflix is the application of engineering talent to distribute video. But that doesnt make them tech companies, because they dont SELL or LICENSE that tech to others. Their product itself isnt tech for others to use. They have in housed software, and they use their software development prowess as a competitive advantage. "Tech companies" should be reserved for the Microsoft, Google, Apple, Salesforce, SAPs of the world that SELL/LICENSE software that acts as a Business Middleware and Development Platforms. But more importantly, they need to be MORE than just a company that takes business requirements and digitizes them (UltiPro for example, who applies existing Microsoft/Google tech/tools, but isnt creating their own database tech or frameworks. You can be a software assembly company, that solves business problems, without being a tech company,) they need to be inventive, creating new applied knowledge. (In that case, Uber actually does tangentially count, because they are a software middleware to connect drivers and riders, and they are engineering new tech not just reassembling off the shelf components.) For nearly everything else, we can just call a spade a spade and call a company what it actually is. A bank. A car company. Taxi dispatch. Video hosting and production. Semiconductors. Fabrication. Manufacturing. Lumping every company that has good engineering talent into a pile may be good for investors to help categorize investments, but for everyone else it just turns conversation into nonsense.
- sah2ed 7y ago
  You had me until your fourth paragraph. If your argument is that Uber, Netflix are not tech vendors because they sell a service; they do not sell/license software, then you are correct. Oftentimes the label tech company is used as shorthand for Internet company — a company that leverages the near-zero distribution cost of the Internet to deliver a product (e.g. Google Search, Facebook) or a service (e.g urban mobility via Uber, home delivery via Amazon). In this sense, it would not be correct to say Uber or Netflix are not tech companies.
  - basch 7y ago
    My argument is that if we use tech to mean what it means (the application of knowledge) that MANY MANY MANY different types of companies fall under one useless blanket. Dow, Dupont, Ford, Goldman Sachs, Chase etc. Instead we should call them what they are, chemical companies and banks. Every bank is now an "internet company." Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon build databases, programming frameworks, hardware, operating systems. "Tech platform vendor?"
    - sah2ed 7y ago
      The label can be useless, I agree, which is why I try to limit my use to certain contexts where its use makes sense or can be inferred correctly. I do think we should limit its use to something of a legal term, as I tried to explain elsewhere in the thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20879152 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20879152
- erikpukinskis 7y ago
  Tech just means computing.
quaquaqua1 7y ago
Uber is not a transportation company-- they neither manufacture transport vehicles nor provide transportation services (according to the law). Rather, they provide a post-paid software platform for individuals to provide transportation services to customers directly. Delta is a transportation company because Delta is cutting the checks for the purchases and maintenance of the airplanes. Sure, it's a spectrum, but Delta isn't a tech company. Skyscanner and Booking.com are tech companies that fulfill an Uber-like service for Delta.
- marinman 7y ago
  This is trying to be too clever by a half with the semantics. When people say they're going to Uber somewhere, they're not saying they're going to use a post-paid software to connect with individuals offering rides. The fact they've skirted the labor laws to technically not be the employers is neither here nor there.
  - quaquaqua1 7y ago
    I honestly can see where you are coming from but I think the IRS distinction is important here. Uber isn't saying, "you must drive from 9am to 5pm. you must use our vehicle and company expense account." Mechanics get hit with these types of laws as well. Mechanics are often required to bring their own tools to work, but since they often work at the business' garage during the business' hours (not at their home garage at 2am for example), they are W2. You are exactly right that the service rendered is exactly the same ("I wanna uber there" == "I want a taxi company to drive me there"). But from an expenditure standpoint, a Taxi Company is not spending money on cloud services and programmer salaries.
- cwilkes 7y ago
  Perhaps it is better to talk about divisions of these large companies instead of trying to classify the whole. By your definition of cutting checks NASA can also be called a transportation company.

by cptaj 7y ago

sjs7007 7y ago

Discounting Uber as just an app would be silly too. The scale they have to deal with is probably one of the world's biggest and they do contribute back too open source aka making new tech.

basch 7y ago

Everyone seems to be equating tech to mean circuits, runs on electricity, or computer code. Thats not what technology means. Tech is getting throw around because its hard to categorize some companies. Technology is "the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry." People tend to confuse tech and tools. The lever is a tool. Using a lever to create leverage, is technology. (You can argue that the lever is technology too, in that its applied knowledge of smelting, but that misses the point.) Uber is the application of engineering talent to automate taxi dispatch. Netflix is the application of engineering talent to distribute video. But that doesnt make them tech companies, because they dont SELL or LICENSE that tech to others. Their product itself isnt tech for others to use. They have in housed software, and they use their software development prowess as a competitive advantage. "Tech companies" should be reserved for the Microsoft, Google, Apple, Salesforce, SAPs of the world that SELL/LICENSE software that acts as a Business Middleware and Development Platforms. But more importantly, they need to be MORE than just a company that takes business requirements and digitizes them (UltiPro for example, who applies existing Microsoft/Google tech/tools, but isnt creating their own database tech or frameworks. You can be a software assembly company, that solves business problems, without being a tech company,) they need to be inventive, creating new applied knowledge. (In that case, Uber actually does tangentially count, because they are a software middleware to connect drivers and riders, and they are engineering new tech not just reassembling off the shelf components.) For nearly everything else, we can just call a spade a spade and call a company what it actually is. A bank. A car company. Taxi dispatch. Video hosting and production. Semiconductors. Fabrication. Manufacturing. Lumping every company that has good engineering talent into a pile may be good for investors to help categorize investments, but for everyone else it just turns conversation into nonsense.

sah2ed 7y ago
You had me until your fourth paragraph. If your argument is that Uber, Netflix are not tech vendors because they sell a service; they do not sell/license software, then you are correct. Oftentimes the label tech company is used as shorthand for Internet company — a company that leverages the near-zero distribution cost of the Internet to deliver a product (e.g. Google Search, Facebook) or a service (e.g urban mobility via Uber, home delivery via Amazon). In this sense, it would not be correct to say Uber or Netflix are not tech companies.
- basch 7y ago
  My argument is that if we use tech to mean what it means (the application of knowledge) that MANY MANY MANY different types of companies fall under one useless blanket. Dow, Dupont, Ford, Goldman Sachs, Chase etc. Instead we should call them what they are, chemical companies and banks. Every bank is now an "internet company." Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon build databases, programming frameworks, hardware, operating systems. "Tech platform vendor?"
  - sah2ed 7y ago
    The label can be useless, I agree, which is why I try to limit my use to certain contexts where its use makes sense or can be inferred correctly. I do think we should limit its use to something of a legal term, as I tried to explain elsewhere in the thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20879152 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20879152
erikpukinskis 7y ago
Tech just means computing.

quaquaqua1 7y ago

Uber is not a transportation company-- they neither manufacture transport vehicles nor provide transportation services (according to the law). Rather, they provide a post-paid software platform for individuals to provide transportation services to customers directly. Delta is a transportation company because Delta is cutting the checks for the purchases and maintenance of the airplanes. Sure, it's a spectrum, but Delta isn't a tech company. Skyscanner and Booking.com are tech companies that fulfill an Uber-like service for Delta.

marinman 7y ago
This is trying to be too clever by a half with the semantics. When people say they're going to Uber somewhere, they're not saying they're going to use a post-paid software to connect with individuals offering rides. The fact they've skirted the labor laws to technically not be the employers is neither here nor there.
- quaquaqua1 7y ago
  I honestly can see where you are coming from but I think the IRS distinction is important here. Uber isn't saying, "you must drive from 9am to 5pm. you must use our vehicle and company expense account." Mechanics get hit with these types of laws as well. Mechanics are often required to bring their own tools to work, but since they often work at the business' garage during the business' hours (not at their home garage at 2am for example), they are W2. You are exactly right that the service rendered is exactly the same ("I wanna uber there" == "I want a taxi company to drive me there"). But from an expenditure standpoint, a Taxi Company is not spending money on cloud services and programmer salaries.
cwilkes 7y ago
Perhaps it is better to talk about divisions of these large companies instead of trying to classify the whole. By your definition of cutting checks NASA can also be called a transportation company.