Comments on: Diffusion confusion. http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/ Fri, 03 Feb 2012 14:29:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: prada outlet http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-668 prada outlet Mon, 07 Jun 2010 01:49:00 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-668 Hhe article's content rich variety which make us move for our mood after reading this article. surprise, here you will find what you want! Recently, I found some wedsites which commodity is research-laboratory colorful of fashion. Such as that worth you to see. Believe me these websites won’t let you down. Hhe article’s content rich variety which make us move for our mood after reading this article. surprise, here you will find what you want! Recently, I found some wedsites which commodity is research-laboratory colorful of fashion. Such as that worth you to see. Believe me these websites won’t let you down.

]]> By: gucci http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-669 gucci Fri, 04 Jun 2010 01:12:00 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-669 Well , the view of the passage is totally correct ,your details is really reasonable and you guy give us valuable informative post, I totally agree the standpoint of upstairs. I often surfing on this forum when I m free and I find there are so much good information we can learn in this forum! http://www.brfinder.net/ Well , the view of the passage is totally correct ,your details is really reasonable and you guy give us valuable informative post, I totally agree the standpoint of upstairs. I often surfing on this forum when I m free and I find there are so much good information we can learn in this forum! http://www.brfinder.net/

]]> By: air jordan 8 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-670 air jordan 8 Tue, 01 Jun 2010 07:04:00 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-670 It looks good,I have learn a recruit! Recently,I found an excellent online store, the XX are completely various, good quality and cheap price,it’s worth buying! http://www.globalcommuni-cation.com/ It looks good,I have learn a recruit!
Recently,I found an excellent online store, the XX are completely various, good quality and cheap price,it’s worth buying! http://www.globalcommuni-cation.com/

]]> By: gucci http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-671 gucci Tue, 01 Jun 2010 02:04:00 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-671 "Well , the view of the passage is totally correct ,your details is really reasonable and you guy give us valuable informative post, I totally agree the standpoint of upstairs. I often surfing on this forum when I m free and I find there are so much good information we can learn in brfinder.net this forum! “Well , the view of the passage is totally correct ,your details is really reasonable and you guy give us valuable informative post, I totally agree the standpoint of upstairs. I often surfing on this forum when I m free and I find there are so much good information we can learn in brfinder.net this forum!

]]> By: Planner Reads » Blog Archive » Consistency for modern brands: more complex but also more important. http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-667 Planner Reads » Blog Archive » Consistency for modern brands: more complex but also more important. Thu, 11 Feb 2010 03:35:19 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-667 [...] exactly a year ago, I wrote a post that talked about the different forms of innovation that a company might want to provide. At that time I [...] [...] exactly a year ago, I wrote a post that talked about the different forms of innovation that a company might want to provide. At that time I [...]

]]> By: Consistency for modern brands: more complex but also more important. | From The Head Of Zeus Jones http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-666 Consistency for modern brands: more complex but also more important. | From The Head Of Zeus Jones Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:25:15 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-666 [...] exactly a year ago, I wrote a post that talked about the different forms of innovation that a company might want to provide. At that time I said: “Google hasn’t really ever been the innovator. While its products are [...] [...] exactly a year ago, I wrote a post that talked about the different forms of innovation that a company might want to provide. At that time I said: “Google hasn’t really ever been the innovator. While its products are [...]

]]> By: adrian http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-665 adrian Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:39:52 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-665 Hi Mark, good to see you here. I think that broad mass-market innovations are quite different in nature from small, early adopter innovations. To me they require different kinds of thinking. "Small" innovations tend to be based upon product or technological innovation. Broad innovations tend to be based upon people and their behaviour. It's not necessarily true that the kinds of skills (or culture) that create one kind of innovation will transfer over to the other. Microsoft is a great case for this. They have invested billions in building advanced research campuses all over the world, yet at the same time, it's pretty clear they've lost the lead in big broad areas like OS, browser, search, etc. I worked on Microsoft in the mid 90s when they felt unstoppable. Their strategy then was to incorporate more and more advanced technology into their OS in a way that made it very easy for average people to use. Everyone complained but it worked. I think the anti-trust trial and ego derailed them from being who they really are. Hi Mark, good to see you here.

I think that broad mass-market innovations are quite different in nature from small, early adopter innovations. To me they require different kinds of thinking. “Small” innovations tend to be based upon product or technological innovation. Broad innovations tend to be based upon people and their behaviour. It’s not necessarily true that the kinds of skills (or culture) that create one kind of innovation will transfer over to the other. Microsoft is a great case for this. They have invested billions in building advanced research campuses all over the world, yet at the same time, it’s pretty clear they’ve lost the lead in big broad areas like OS, browser, search, etc.

I worked on Microsoft in the mid 90s when they felt unstoppable. Their strategy then was to incorporate more and more advanced technology into their OS in a way that made it very easy for average people to use. Everyone complained but it worked.

I think the anti-trust trial and ego derailed them from being who they really are.

]]> By: Mark Lewis http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-664 Mark Lewis Thu, 05 Feb 2009 01:03:06 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-664 Adrian Very interesting post. Do you not think it is a good idea for a company (especially one the size of Microsoft or Google) to play in several kinds of innovation? I would two arguments for this: one is that bringing your own innovations downsteam increases the profit from and inventive to innovate. The second is that it enables you to surprise peole and crate more momentum behind your brand. I buy your point that focusing the company's culture is key but isn't a general focus on innovation enough? Adrian

Very interesting post. Do you not think it is a good idea for a company (especially one the size of Microsoft or Google) to play in several kinds of innovation? I would two arguments for this: one is that bringing your own innovations downsteam increases the profit from and inventive to innovate. The second is that it enables you to surprise peole and crate more momentum behind your brand.

I buy your point that focusing the company’s culture is key but isn’t a general focus on innovation enough?

]]> By: Simon Kendrick http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-663 Simon Kendrick Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:55:23 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-663 Interesting thought, as always. In some respects, it seems like Microsoft spent too long on evolution in one field (Desktop apps) when the market was moving on. Now they are turning to revolution in order to change the perception that they are behind the times. It may not be as profitable, but it may be necessary. This is probably reading too much into it but Google has taken their position as the main distributor the the masses; so they are tentatively looking to compete with Apple in different niches. Interesting thought, as always. In some respects, it seems like Microsoft spent too long on evolution in one field (Desktop apps) when the market was moving on. Now they are turning to revolution in order to change the perception that they are behind the times. It may not be as profitable, but it may be necessary. This is probably reading too much into it but Google has taken their position as the main distributor the the masses; so they are tentatively looking to compete with Apple in different niches.

]]> By: adrian http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-662 adrian Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:24:38 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-662 Hi Fred, Thanks for stopping by. It's funny I was also going to add Photosynth to this post too. I have exactly the same feeling about it that you have. To date all they've produced from it besides CNN is a Ted presentation and an iPhone app which is more of a tech demo. Photosynth is very advanced, and mainstream usage for this kind of product is very unclear. I really don't think Microsoft understands how, or is built, to do anything with stuff like this. Hi Fred,

Thanks for stopping by. It’s funny I was also going to add Photosynth to this post too. I have exactly the same feeling about it that you have. To date all they’ve produced from it besides CNN is a Ted presentation and an iPhone app which is more of a tech demo. Photosynth is very advanced, and mainstream usage for this kind of product is very unclear. I really don’t think Microsoft understands how, or is built, to do anything with stuff like this.

]]> By: Fred Hundt http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-661 Fred Hundt Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:06:03 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-661 Adrian, Good thought-provoking post. I believe you're right about Songsmith potentially weakening Microsoft's brand. I think Microsoft's acquisition of Seadragon and photosynth is similar. Blaise Agueras y Arcas is like a beautiful tropical bird kept in a gilded cage. It's not clear that Microsoft will use his incredible technology for anything more than product placement on cnn.com. Of course, Hugh MacLeod thinks Microsoft can "change the world or go home." Adrian,
Good thought-provoking post. I believe you’re right about Songsmith potentially weakening Microsoft’s brand. I think Microsoft’s acquisition of Seadragon and photosynth is similar. Blaise Agueras y Arcas is like a beautiful tropical bird kept in a gilded cage. It’s not clear that Microsoft will use his incredible technology for anything more than product placement on cnn.com. Of course, Hugh MacLeod thinks Microsoft can “change the world or go home.”

]]> By: adrian http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-660 adrian Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:01:19 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-660 Good points, I agree - fostering a culture of innovation in side projects definitely helps support innovation overall. However, I'm not talking about MSFT just sticking to core products like OS and Office, but rather to the core philosophy of bringing innovations to the masses. I think that lets them get into lots of businesses but it helps to solidify what I expect from them. It used to be if I wanted trusted, proven technology that will work for most people, I would turn to MSFT. Now, I'm not so sure they can give that to me. That's a problem. Good points, I agree – fostering a culture of innovation in side projects definitely helps support innovation overall.

However, I’m not talking about MSFT just sticking to core products like OS and Office, but rather to the core philosophy of bringing innovations to the masses. I think that lets them get into lots of businesses but it helps to solidify what I expect from them. It used to be if I wanted trusted, proven technology that will work for most people, I would turn to MSFT. Now, I’m not so sure they can give that to me. That’s a problem.

]]> By: David Esrati http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/2009/diffusion-confusion/#comment-659 David Esrati Wed, 04 Feb 2009 15:51:37 +0000 http://www.zeusjones.com/blog/?p=771#comment-659 Adrian- If you don't have a culture of innovation within the company- you'll be hard pressed to innovate. Without side projects- how will you bring people in who can help foster the change that's needed. That's why Google gives it's employees 20% of their time to woodshed. It's good for both Google and the staff. Microsoft would be making a huge mistake sticking to the knitting- as Tom Peters would have called it- in the narrow sense of an OS or Office- They should be a company centered on empowering users to create using their tools. Adrian-
If you don’t have a culture of innovation within the company- you’ll be hard pressed to innovate.
Without side projects- how will you bring people in who can help foster the change that’s needed.
That’s why Google gives it’s employees 20% of their time to woodshed. It’s good for both Google and the staff.
Microsoft would be making a huge mistake sticking to the knitting- as Tom Peters would have called it- in the narrow sense of an OS or Office-
They should be a company centered on empowering users to create using their tools.

]]>