21–30 of 32 posts
Remember when everything had to be "interactive"?
What about "multimedia"? you just can't buy a toaster that isn't multimedia!
"Pivot" is already frowned upon, 2.0 is totally 2004, just to show some buzzwords are about to disappear.
If one or more people at your company need to constantly read recent scientific research papers in one or more fields of one or more of the hard sciences in order to build a critical and central component of one or more of your central products then you're a technology company.
The only difference this will have with the OP's definition is that even if you decide not to license your applied science to others but merely sell an application, you're still a technology company. E.g. if you actually read physics papers in order to come up with a novel microwave emitter, you're still a technology company even if you've decided to just sell microwave ovens.
OTOH, if all you need to develop your product is news about the latest web framework, or even a blog post explaining some nice sorting algorithm - you're an applications company.
However, language is defined by how we use it. In common parlance, "tech company" means the latter kind of company. Normatively decreeing otherwise is futile.
Should we talk more about the former kind? Yes. But I disagree that the latter kind is not a useful category. Distinguishing between "factory companies" and "non-factory companies" was probably very useful at the beginning of the industrial revolution. We're still in the early days of the information revolution.
By "software is eating the world", we don't mean that every company uses email or has a blog. That's not software that gives a competitive advantage, precisely because everyone already has it. "Software is eating the world" means that Uber is a better taxi dispatch service than traditional taxi dispatch services, because of software they developed. It means Netflix is a better movie rental service than Blockbuster, because of software they developed. It means Apple and Google upended every mobile phone manufacturer and carrier, because they could develop better operating systems and browsers.
"Software is eating the world" does NOT mean that every company uses software (duh), but rather that companies with software competency (or even excellence) will have a significant advantage with which to edge out their competitors.
The "software is eating the world" meme when put into perspective is like saying "accounting practices are eating the world" or "sales strategies are eating the world" in 99% of real world cases. In most businesses, software has become another staple support of a competitive business but it is not an end in itself. In other words, software is a means of trying to achieve maximum efficiency of existing processes and t…
When my paper airline ticket is replaced by software (the ticket shows on my phone's screen), is that streamlining existing processes or replacing them?
Your perspective may depend on whether you make printers or not.
Email streamlines communications by replacing letters and stamps.
Software is streamlining video rentals by replacing DVDs with downloads and streams. When the DVD factories shut down, is nothing being "eaten"?
etc.
Kinda, you can tell what kind of a company is by where it makes it's profit. IBM is a services company that develops technology so it can service that technology. Microsoft is a desktop operating system and office suite company that develops software to sell desktop operating system and office suites. Apple is a consumer electronics company that develops technology to sell gizmos. Facebook is an ad platform company t…
I think ARM falls nicely into "technology company". Calling something "a licensing company" doesn't make sense when they license their own technology products.
Same for IBM. They might service software from other vendors, but I suspect most of their profit is by servicing their own. As such, again, it doesn't make much sense to call them "a services company".
Kinda, you can tell what kind of a company is by where it makes it's profit. IBM is a services company that develops technology so it can service that technology. Microsoft is a desktop operating system and office suite company that develops software to sell desktop operating system and office suites. Apple is a consumer electronics company that develops technology to sell gizmos. Facebook is an ad platform company t…
"ARM is a licensing company that develops technology so it can sell licenses." I think ARM falls nicely into "technology company". Calling something "a licensing company" doesn't make sense when they license their own technology products. Same for IBM. They might service software from other vendors, but I suspect most of their profit is by servicing their own. As such, again, it doesn't make much sense to call them "…
Impressive. When I was a kid, I went straight for the comics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"ARM is a licensing company that develops technology so it can sell licenses." I think ARM falls nicely into "technology company". Calling something "a licensing company" doesn't make sense when they license their own technology products. Same for IBM. They might service software from other vendors, but I suspect most of their profit is by servicing their own. As such, again, it doesn't make much sense to call them "…
IBM also makes a large amount of money servicing and implementing other company's technology products, specifically SAP and Oracle (and probably a lot of Microsoft too). To me, they are a technology services company providing consulting, implementation, and outsourcing services, and they also happen to develop some of the technology products that they sometimes implement.