One Step Forward, Two Steps Back

Recently some articles on the TechFlash have introduced Microsoft's cutting-edge technologies. Each technology is cool and, needless to say, is expected to launch as up-and-coming products (visit for more other videos: Todd Bishop's Microsoft blog. However, stories of businesses by stunning technologies aren't generally in progress, and reach the happy end. There are some reasons why brilliant technologies don't promise to be success and to be accepted by consumers.

For instance, an electric car was already invented in the mid-19th century, and seemed to get legitimacy by consumers between 1890s and 1900s. But, the history was different. In fact, electric vehicles were defeated by gasoline cars as a result of competition regarding more popularity (A story of why people changed from horses to cars as a transportation by NOVA is interesting. If you are interested in it, click on THIS.). Since then electric cars have waited for a century to get the tipping point. They would seem to build status instead of gasoline cars within a few decades.

Why are technologies so difficult or taken much time to be accepted by consumers? Cameras, TVs, Computers, the Internet, Google, Facebook, Smartphones, and so on look like easy to diffuse markets. But, each had different difficulty in the way to accomplish the tipping point (btw, Malcolm Gladwell is actually my favorite author.). As far as I know, lots of books and theories tell us how to break the wall in order to get citizenship in markets (As references from a point of view of marketing and management, Blue Occean Strategy, The Innovator's Dilemma, Crossing the Chasm, et cetera.).

Here, from my point of view, I would like to make a comment. Obviously, some of technologies like the above video are too daring. They are hard and difficult for customers to figure out, and they are even far away from and beyond their life style. Thus, a problem for the hyper cutting-edge technologies is how to sell products with such technologies. In other words, it is a marketing problem. A good example is the Apple Inc.. iPhone is one of the great gadget and at the same time a blockbuster. Also, Mac series, despite having maniac functions, have contributed to build and acknowledge the Apple brand by consumers. A key for diffusion is that it is recognized as cool and stylish not like gizmo. On other hand, PlayStation and Xperia by Sony -- especially, PlayStation 3 and Xperia TM PLAY -- is too having functions and qualities, such as too beautiful screens and sounds, too much capacity to play game and use cellphone, and so on. Apparently, the target customers are not everybody but a part (and, actually I don't know how much they are sold, so this opinion is not strong and needed more information, though).

As long as I saw the videos by Microsoft, they are trying to promote their technologies with their familiar products like Xbox360 and Kinect. I think this is a good way. However, Microsoft should pay attention not to be caught a competency trap (aka an innovator dilemma), as examples for it; actually Sony's PlayStation 3 and more likely film cameras (More in detail: Organizational Learning, or The Innovator's Dilemma). They always have to stare at customers in order to avoid happening such situation (Unfortunately, Microsoft is already called as 20 centuries company). At the same time, we consumers have to catch up with their cutting-edge technologies, too!!