Skip navigation

Tag Archives: tecnologia

Via VCU BrandCenter

‘Product’ will be reinvented, just as music and media were reinvented by iTunes and blogs: there is a world appearing in between the big guys and the little hobbyists. The middle is getting filled in.”

If you look 50 years ago, or 100 years ago, the technology in our homes was the offcuts of the military, or of factories, of industry. Look at computers, which came in equal parts from the need to calculate ballistics in the world wars, and from Silicon Valley, which was at the heart of Cold War investment into space and rocketry. Or mobile phones, which came from battlefield communications. Or even dishwashers and washing machines, which were spin-offs of technology originated in factories.”

“Now you look, [and] the bleeding edge of technology in the home originates from consumer use. The iPhone is better than anything the military ever made. Toys are a great place to look for the latest technology. And even computers, which used to be driven by office use and mainframes, are now led by the nose by technology in personal tablets and laptops, used for games and consuming media. So we’ve flipped from the industrial to the domestic.”

“Although Apple has done enormously well on this flip — that is, the iPhone and iPad — I don’t believe this change has been fully understood or fully taken advantage of. We’re surrounded by these behemoths of mass consumption, mass production, mass media — and they’re all artifacts of an age of economies of scale, and margins measured in fractions of scents, and advertising at grand scales. These industrial assumptions no longer hold, and all kinds of new opportunities are opening up. So for me, I’m thinking about the home, and about short-run manufacture, and about robots, and about technology used by small social groups like families. How do we visualise and design for all of this? It’s all good fun.”

Via GigaOm

DIY rullez!!

Using wikis and digital fabrication tools, TED Fellow Marcin Jakubowski is open-sourcing the blueprints for 50 farm machines, allowing anyone to build their own tractor or harvester from scratch. And that’s only the first step in a project to write an instruction set for an entire self-sustaining village (starting cost: $10,000).

Bela forma de abordar os desafios da comunicação: falando da forma equivocada como encaramos o tempo. O título do post é do McLuhan.

Via 180360720

Sim, é isso que você está imaginando. Tem uma câmera no carrinho para você gravar a sua corrida e, espante-se, uma tela de LCD embaixo (!?!?!) do carro. Ainda dá para enviar pelas redes sociais, depois de editar e acrescentar efeitos e som. Tem mais. Você ainda pode colocar o carrinho no seu skate ou capacete e filmar suas incursões sobre rodas.

Via UoD.

Um dos textos mais fodas que eu já li sobre a internet. Adam Gopnik, da New Yorker, simplesmente juntu tudo o que foi escrito de relevante sobre a internet, dividiu em três correntes e criticou divinamente:

All three kinds appear among the new books about the Internet: call them the Never-Betters, the Better-Nevers, and the Ever-Wasers. The Never-Betters believe that we’re on the brink of a new utopia, where information will be free and democratic, news will be made from the bottom up, love will reign, and cookies will bake themselves. The Better-Nevers think that we would have been better off if the whole thing had never happened, that the world that is coming to an end is superior to the one that is taking its place, and that, at a minimum, books and magazines create private space for minds in ways that twenty-second bursts of information don’t. The Ever-Wasers insist that at any moment in modernity something like this is going on, and that a new way of organizing data and connecting users is always thrilling to some and chilling to others—that something like this is going on is exactly what makes it a modern moment. One’s hopes rest with the Never-Betters; one’s head with the Ever-Wasers; and one’s heart? Well, twenty or so books in, one’s heart tends to move toward the Better-Nevers, and then bounce back toward someplace that looks more like home.

Essa parte aqui é uma pedrada:

It is the wraparound presence, not the specific evils, of the machine that oppresses us. Simply reducing the machine’s presence will go a long way toward alleviating the disorder. Which points, in turn, to a dog-not-barking-in-the-nighttime detail that may be significant. In the Better-Never books, television isn’t scanted or ignored; it’s celebrated. When William Powers, in “Hamlet’s BlackBerry,” describes the deal his family makes to have an Unplugged Sunday, he tells us that the No Screens agreement doesn’t include television: “For us, television had always been a mostly communal experience, a way of coming together rather than pulling apart.” (“Can you please turn off your damn computer and come watch television with the rest of the family,” the dad now cries to the teen-ager.)

Vale muito a leitura.

Do inigualável Nick Carr.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Aí embaixo tem alguns trechos de um dos posts mais fodas que eu já li, uma verdadeira aula magna sobre negócios. Na verdade é uma baita análise sobre a RIM, responsável pelo blackberry e que se encontra em uma bela sinuca de bico, apesar de faturar astronômicos 15 bilhões por ano. Mas a melhor parte é quando o cara fala sobre seu antigo trabalho na Apple para explicar a situação da RIM.

When I worked at Apple, I spent a lot of time studying failed computer platforms. I thought that if we understood the failures, we might be able to prevent the same thing from happening to us.

I looked at everything from videogame companies to the early PC pioneers (companies like Commodore and Atari), and I found an interesting pattern in their financial results. The early symptoms of decline in a computing platform were very subtle, and easy for a business executive to rationalize away. By the time the symptoms became obvious, it was usually too late to do anything about them.

The symptoms to watch closely are small declines in two metrics: the rate of growth of sales, and gross profit per unit sold (gross margins). Here’s why:

Every computing platform has a natural pool of customers. Some people need or want the platform, and some people don’t. Your product spreads through its pool of customers via the traditional “diffusion” process — early enthusiasts first, late adopters at the end.

It’s relatively easy to get good revenue from the early adopters. They seek out innovations like yours, and are willing to pay top dollar for it. As the market for a computer system matures, the early adopters get used up, and the company starts selling to middle adopters who are more price-sensitive. In response to this, the company cuts prices, which results in a big jump in sales. Total revenue goes up, and usually overall profits as well. Everybody in the company feels good.

Time passes, and that middle portion of the market gets consumed. Eventually demand growth starts to drop, and you make another price cut. Sales go up again, sometimes a lot. With revenue rising, you and your investors talk proudly about the benefits of reaching the “mainstream” market.

What you don’t realize at this point is that you’re not “reaching the mainstream,” you’re actually consuming the late adopters. Unfortunately, it’s very difficult to tell when you’re selling to the late adopters. They don’t wear signs. Companies tend to assume that because the adoption curve is drawn as a smooth-sided bell, your demand will tail off at the end as gradually as it built up in the beginning. But that isn’t how it works. At the start, you are slowly building up momentum from a base of nothing. That takes years. But by the time you saturate the market you have built up huge sales momentum. You have a strong brand, you have advertising, you have a big distribution channel. You’ll gulp through the late adopters really rapidly. The result is that sales continue to grow until they drop suddenly, like a sprinter running off the edge of a cliff.

Until you get close to the end, your revenue keeps rising, enabling you to tell yourself that the business is still in good shape. But eventually you reach the dregs of the market, and sales will flatten out, or maybe even start to drop. You cut prices again, but this time they don’t increase demand because there are no latent customers left. All the cuts do is reduce further the revenue you get from selling upgrades to your installed base. The combination of price cuts and declining sales produces a surprisingly rapid drop in revenue and profits. If you want to make a profit (which your investors demand), your only choice is to make massive cuts in expenses. Those cuts usually end up eliminating the risky new product ideas that are your only hope of re-igniting demand.

At Apple I called this the platform “death spiral” because once you get into it, the expense cuts and sales declines reinforce each other. It’s almost impossible to reverse the process, unless you’re Steve Jobs and you get very lucky.

The best way to survive is to stay away from the cliff edge in the first place. But that means you need to be hyper-attentive to small changes in sales growth and gross margins.

Via Mobile Opportunity

Ainda nem dei o play, mas Amber Case é certeza de coisa fina.

Se você gostou da amber, veja este vídeo e se bole.