4 ms·
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 softwa
by 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 agoMy 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 agoThe 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