4 ms·

> " One of the very first PaaS offerings in history actually belonged to Canon ... until it was abruptly killed by Canon itself" There are dozens of examples o

> " One of the very first PaaS offerings in history actually belonged to Canon ... until it was abruptly killed by Canon itself" There are dozens of examples of people being first to market and not winning (Canon). As so, what's so interesting about this article? - Facebook won, when MySpace and others were first to market - Google won, and it was crazy late to market over Yahoo/Altavista/Excite. - Starbucks won, when plenty of other national coffee chains existed etc

toast0 5y ago
What's an example of being first to market and winning a big market? I can't think of any. First to market isn't the advantage that people think it is. It might be more important for smaller markets, perhaps.
- lowkey_ 5y ago
  Netflix, Uber, Amazon, PayPal, etc? It's hard to exactly define "first to market." Was Google first to market because they were the first to have a search engine that functioned in the way theirs did, and should we put more primitive search engines in the same category? Was Dropbox first to market? Did they win the market? It often feels like a company is first to market, and then they win that market... and then maybe five or ten years later, an innovation comes along from a new company and they lose the market. That's just the way the market is supposed to work, and natural, but there's still an advantage to being first to market in having those years of market dominance.
  - kube-system 5y ago
    It depends on how you define the market. I think it's pretty hard to say Google was first to any market with any reasonable definition. They're an example of how you don't have to be first if you are better. Even if you define the early Google market as a "natural language web crawler search engines", they weren't the first.
  - toast0 5y ago
    > Netflix, Uber, Amazon, PayPal, etc? Not sure if Netflix was first to DVD by mail, quite possibly; they were early, and I don't know if VHS rental by mail was ever a thing. Uber may have been the first to internet hail livery vehicles, but Sidecar was the first to do internet ridesharing as an app, and Lyft was the first to call unlicensed taxi service ridesharing. Uber is winning in the marketplace at the moment though and Sidecar is dead; of course, winning in this market still means burning money. Amazon was early to selling books on the web, but e-commerce catalog sales were available on pre-Internet information services. AWS defined a new category of managed hosting, but lots of other companies did similar things before. I think BillPoint may have slightly predated PayPal. Being early here seems to have had staying power, as Yahoo's PayDirect didn't do well enough to stick around. Otoh, Venmo was good enough to buy, Zelle seems popular, and other easy credit card processors like Square and such seem to be winning over that side of PayPal's market. There's a moat, but it's not very deep. > Was Dropbox first to market? Did they win the market? No, there was XDrive and Yahoo Briefcase and probably more that launched and shutdown before Dropbox. Not sure if Dropbox won, OneDrive and Google Drive are contenders still.
- krasin 5y ago
  Bell Telephone Company was first to the market and won. It's now known as AT&T.
  - kube-system 5y ago
    > It's now known as AT&T. ... and Verizon, and a few others.
- colechristensen 5y ago
  The first commercial power plant in the US became Consolidated Edison which is still going 140 years later with a market cap of $27 billion.
- fomine3 5y ago
  Intel for personal computer? It seems that Intel 8008/8080 based (hobby) PCs were very early one. Intel is the king for PC market until recently (so about 50 years?), but they are now losing market by ARM and AMD. Though maybe Intel didn't intended 8008/8080 is used for personal computer.
- newdude116 5y ago
  ? A classical "the winner takes it all" business. Example: ebay Counterexample: Flight booking
webmaven 5y ago
In general, the examples you cite are of early entrants being outcompeted by later entrants. Zimki was shut down despite (or because of?) it's success and experiencing he initial stages of hypergrowth. The successful PaaS entrants didn't show up until after Zimki had been defunct for a while. You could also characterize this as "innovative startup strangled by acquiring behemoth or clueless greedy investors" which brings to mind a different set of examples, but that's not much more interesting. What makes Zimki interesting IMO is that Simon Wardley successfully "timed the market" of technological change, clearly explained his thinking, and has since applied the same logic to make other correct predictions (or give good strategic advice).
- ignoramous 5y ago
  > What makes Zimki interesting IMO is that Simon Wardley successfully "timed the market" of technological change, clearly explained his thinking, and has since applied the same logic to make other correct predictions (or give good strategic advice). Has Wardley mentioned why they didn't pursue the start-up route (like Eric Yuan at zoom.us did; or Benoit Dageville, Thierry Cruanes at SnowflakeDB did, to give recent examples)?
  - webmaven 5y ago
    Not so far as I know. I always assumed that restrictive non-competes prevented moving quickly, and that Google's launch of AppEngine then sucked the oxygen from the room.
908B64B197 5y ago
> Facebook won, when MySpace and others were first to market Facebook had a valuable userbase and a polished product (it looked good, no templates and music on auto-play) > Google won, and it was crazy late to market over Yahoo/Altavista/Excite. Google had a better product, plain simple. > Starbucks won, when plenty of other national coffee chains existed Starbucks won partly because it had "Italian coffee". Nobody else had espresso machines in as many locations as they did.
- josephg 5y ago
  > Starbucks won partly because it had "Italian coffee". Nobody else had espresso machines in as many locations as they did. Yes exactly. Here in Melbourne (where we have a culture of European style espresso everywhere), Starbucks has barely been able to get a foothold in the market.
- hellbannedguy 5y ago
  Starbucks won because they recreated a friendly living room. I always felt their coffee sucked, but their employees have always been nice, and friendly. I enjoyed getting out, people watching, and feeling zero pressure to buy anything, or leave. (I've noticed slight changes, like codes to the bathroom, but it's still my favorite place to hang. American perspective.)
  - 908B64B197 5y ago
    > I always felt their coffee sucked Most independents will be better, if there is any around.

toast0 5y ago

What's an example of being first to market and winning a big market? I can't think of any. First to market isn't the advantage that people think it is. It might be more important for smaller markets, perhaps.

lowkey_ 5y ago
Netflix, Uber, Amazon, PayPal, etc? It's hard to exactly define "first to market." Was Google first to market because they were the first to have a search engine that functioned in the way theirs did, and should we put more primitive search engines in the same category? Was Dropbox first to market? Did they win the market? It often feels like a company is first to market, and then they win that market... and then maybe five or ten years later, an innovation comes along from a new company and they lose the market. That's just the way the market is supposed to work, and natural, but there's still an advantage to being first to market in having those years of market dominance.
- kube-system 5y ago
  It depends on how you define the market. I think it's pretty hard to say Google was first to any market with any reasonable definition. They're an example of how you don't have to be first if you are better. Even if you define the early Google market as a "natural language web crawler search engines", they weren't the first.
- toast0 5y ago
  > Netflix, Uber, Amazon, PayPal, etc? Not sure if Netflix was first to DVD by mail, quite possibly; they were early, and I don't know if VHS rental by mail was ever a thing. Uber may have been the first to internet hail livery vehicles, but Sidecar was the first to do internet ridesharing as an app, and Lyft was the first to call unlicensed taxi service ridesharing. Uber is winning in the marketplace at the moment though and Sidecar is dead; of course, winning in this market still means burning money. Amazon was early to selling books on the web, but e-commerce catalog sales were available on pre-Internet information services. AWS defined a new category of managed hosting, but lots of other companies did similar things before. I think BillPoint may have slightly predated PayPal. Being early here seems to have had staying power, as Yahoo's PayDirect didn't do well enough to stick around. Otoh, Venmo was good enough to buy, Zelle seems popular, and other easy credit card processors like Square and such seem to be winning over that side of PayPal's market. There's a moat, but it's not very deep. > Was Dropbox first to market? Did they win the market? No, there was XDrive and Yahoo Briefcase and probably more that launched and shutdown before Dropbox. Not sure if Dropbox won, OneDrive and Google Drive are contenders still.
krasin 5y ago
Bell Telephone Company was first to the market and won. It's now known as AT&T.
- kube-system 5y ago
  > It's now known as AT&T. ... and Verizon, and a few others.
colechristensen 5y ago
The first commercial power plant in the US became Consolidated Edison which is still going 140 years later with a market cap of $27 billion.
fomine3 5y ago
Intel for personal computer? It seems that Intel 8008/8080 based (hobby) PCs were very early one. Intel is the king for PC market until recently (so about 50 years?), but they are now losing market by ARM and AMD. Though maybe Intel didn't intended 8008/8080 is used for personal computer.
newdude116 5y ago
? A classical "the winner takes it all" business. Example: ebay Counterexample: Flight booking

webmaven 5y ago

In general, the examples you cite are of early entrants being outcompeted by later entrants. Zimki was shut down despite (or because of?) it's success and experiencing he initial stages of hypergrowth. The successful PaaS entrants didn't show up until after Zimki had been defunct for a while. You could also characterize this as "innovative startup strangled by acquiring behemoth or clueless greedy investors" which brings to mind a different set of examples, but that's not much more interesting. What makes Zimki interesting IMO is that Simon Wardley successfully "timed the market" of technological change, clearly explained his thinking, and has since applied the same logic to make other correct predictions (or give good strategic advice).

ignoramous 5y ago
> What makes Zimki interesting IMO is that Simon Wardley successfully "timed the market" of technological change, clearly explained his thinking, and has since applied the same logic to make other correct predictions (or give good strategic advice). Has Wardley mentioned why they didn't pursue the start-up route (like Eric Yuan at zoom.us did; or Benoit Dageville, Thierry Cruanes at SnowflakeDB did, to give recent examples)?
- webmaven 5y ago
  Not so far as I know. I always assumed that restrictive non-competes prevented moving quickly, and that Google's launch of AppEngine then sucked the oxygen from the room.

908B64B197 5y ago

> Facebook won, when MySpace and others were first to market Facebook had a valuable userbase and a polished product (it looked good, no templates and music on auto-play) > Google won, and it was crazy late to market over Yahoo/Altavista/Excite. Google had a better product, plain simple. > Starbucks won, when plenty of other national coffee chains existed Starbucks won partly because it had "Italian coffee". Nobody else had espresso machines in as many locations as they did.

josephg 5y ago
> Starbucks won partly because it had "Italian coffee". Nobody else had espresso machines in as many locations as they did. Yes exactly. Here in Melbourne (where we have a culture of European style espresso everywhere), Starbucks has barely been able to get a foothold in the market.
hellbannedguy 5y ago
Starbucks won because they recreated a friendly living room. I always felt their coffee sucked, but their employees have always been nice, and friendly. I enjoyed getting out, people watching, and feeling zero pressure to buy anything, or leave. (I've noticed slight changes, like codes to the bathroom, but it's still my favorite place to hang. American perspective.)
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  > I always felt their coffee sucked Most independents will be better, if there is any around.