Ecosystems interest me ("how do I get my product/feature adopted in a larger landscape?"). The following are some observations everyone could make, yet I see so

Ecosystems interest me ("how do I get my product/feature adopted in a larger landscape?"). The following are some observations everyone could make, yet I see some companies (Microsoft in particular) struggling with it, so maybe it's not that obvious. > The lack of interest in Unimodules taught me that it’s not enough to come up with an opt-in common standard. It's a tough sell if it offers no immediate value to the developer. If there's no immediate value for the user or a big push, they aren't going to be asking for it either. This can turn into a vicious cycle Apple keeps avoiding and Microsoft keeps falling into. > Given it’s far too late to convince each framework to redesign their native module interfaces from the ground up for compatibility, it may be worth exploring a top-down approach instead. That is, producing tools to translate modules from one ecosystem to another “whether they like it or not”. That's the gold standard, IMO. Once you need people to do anything for your feature to work, your work becomes a lot harder. "If everyone would adopt it you'd see the benefit!" doesn't convince many users OR developers. By removing the requirement for developer opt-in, you're suddenly avoiding a huge part of the viscous cycle (no users because no devs, no devs because no users), which is a huge part of Apple's ARM success and probably a good part of Microsoft's ARM failure.