Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 70 posts

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#21

Post by veyron »

kenjackson wrote: post #3

Horrible article. It makes an arbitrary distinction between products and ideas. I'm sure if you asked Michael Dell, even 10 years ago, what his company is about at its core -- he'd probably say something more like delivering technology to consumers and businesses, customized to fit their individual needs, and using the best processes and efficiencies to deliver at the lowest price possible. Don't bother wasting your…

"have even less respect for the Economist." <-- is that even possible?

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#22

Post by m0nastic »

falava wrote: post #8
alanfalcon wrote: post #7

Tell me more about these Japanese hotels from the 8th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoshi_Ryokan

Over 1300 years old, and this is at the bottom of their web page:

"Please use Netscape Navigator and the Shockwave plug-in to see this site in its full majesty."

I'm curious what it will say in another 1300 years.

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#24

Post by rospaya »

veyron wrote: post #21
kenjackson wrote: post #3

Horrible article. It makes an arbitrary distinction between products and ideas. I'm sure if you asked Michael Dell, even 10 years ago, what his company is about at its core -- he'd probably say something more like delivering technology to consumers and businesses, customized to fit their individual needs, and using the best processes and efficiencies to deliver at the lowest price possible. Don't bother wasting your…

"have even less respect for the Economist." <-- is that even possible?

What is your problem with the Economist?

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#27

Post by prodigal_erik »

unclickable wrote: post #17
gwern wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose an IBM stockholder from 100 years ago to now might disagree about how they have nothing in common.

"A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible and exiting only in contemplation of law. It has neither mind nor body of its own."

The metaphor I've always liked is: a pile of money that hires people to make itself bigger.

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#28

Post by powertower »

m0nastic wrote: post #22
falava wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoshi_Ryokan

Over 1300 years old, and this is at the bottom of their web page: "Please use Netscape Navigator and the Shockwave plug-in to see this site in its full majesty." I'm curious what it will say in another 1300 years.

"Teleport to galactic planetary body coordinates: 09248x35624x456643x55633"

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#29

Post by troystribling »

metageek wrote: post #26
warfangle wrote: post #19

I'm surprised AT&T wasn't mentioned. Yes, it was broken up as a monopoly, but it's been slowly growing back into its former self.

Isn't AT&T dead? SBC bought the name, not the company.

SBC bought the company and used the name.

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#30

Post by DavidAdams »

rospaya wrote: post #24
veyron wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"have even less respect for the Economist." <-- is that even possible?

What is your problem with the Economist?

I'm a fan of The Economist, but their big flaw is similar to Consumer Reports' problem: when they focus on their core competency (Economist: geopolitics and finance; CR: rating home appliances) they're the gold standard. But when they venture outside, such as this case of trying to give a quick overview of what makes a technology company successful over the long term, it's obvious that they're out of their depth. Similarly, when CR rates something like bicycles or even high tech gadgets, it can be a little embarrassing, because a lot of time they focus on the wrong attributes out of unfamiliarity.

On the other hand, I think we could put together a pretty august panel of experts on the topic of tech company success out of HR readers, and end up with no suitable conclusion, and ultimately do no better than this Economist article.

Post reply on HN