5 ms·
I'm genuinely curious here: is first mover advantage real? I can think of plenty of examples where the second mouse got the cheese, so to speak (digital cameras
by mrwh 4y ago
I'm genuinely curious here: is first mover advantage real? I can think of plenty of examples where the second mouse got the cheese, so to speak (digital cameras being one; search another; electric cars another, etc etc). Where has being the first, as opposed to the cheapest or best, really mattered?
- jeffbee 4y agoKodak was the first mover and they totally dominated the digital photography business for the first decade of its existence. There's this misinformed folk meme that somehow they didn't know what they had on their hands, but there's no evidence that I can see of that. Kodak shipped a 1.3-megapixel camera 34 years ago! They had literally zero competitors for the first 11 years of the market. They owned all the patents and everyone had to license them.
- jcynix 4y agoAnd Kodak built the first two versions of Apple's QuickTake digicam: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_QuickTake https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_QuickTake I still have some grainy images taken with either a 100 or 150 model somewhere in my archives. But somehow Kodak managed to become the DEC of digital photography.
- mrwh 4y agoYep! Being the first mover doesn't seem to have helped Kodak much. They spent what must have been huge amounts on r&d - all to ultimately destroy their film cash cow, and be taken over by electronics firms.
- LaundroMat 4y agoWhere can I find more on this? I'm very interested in the true story behind Kodak and digital.