Based on your title that the consumers are responsible for innovation and not the tech companies I would say that it is 50% true. Why you may ask? Well let us see it from this perspective companies are the ones that make the product that the consumers buy and for the to stay at the top the company would need to make and release a better product, so both goes hand in hand as the consumers would want to have new technology at their hands companies will have to create them using the fund that they have collected from the consumers.
However for real innovation in technology to be created competition is also the key as if there is no competition in the market then the company that owns the product can monopolize the market space and just milk the consumers by giving small innovations. A great example here is Intel, because they have owned the greatest market share over the last decade since AMD cannot compete with the products they have until Ryzen they are milking the consumers for years with their I series that consumers are willing to pay for a price thus no great innovation was provided. And when innovation came to their competitor they are having a hard time releasing products that can compete to it.
Topic: Companies aren't responsible for innovation, consumers are - page 2. (Read 731 times)
It can be thought that way. The products are made to meet the demands of the consumers. So their needs are the reason behind the invention of new products. And on the demand of the products, vary the value of the coins.
That's not exactly how it works, technology evolves in many directions. Hardware not only becomes faster, but also more cost-efficient. A decade ago smartphones were for the middle class, today even very poor people in third world countries have them, and functionally there's really not that much difference between them. So, irrational consumerism is not the only reason behind innovation.
Next, if entrepreneurs were only taking existing demand into account, we'd still be living in stone age. All major innovations start with raw ideas without thinking too much about potential users. Satoshi created Bitcoin and showed it to a small group of crypto enthusiasts, he didn't bother spending time on marketing. He knew that if technology is good, people will come on their own, because the word will spread.
Next, if entrepreneurs were only taking existing demand into account, we'd still be living in stone age. All major innovations start with raw ideas without thinking too much about potential users. Satoshi created Bitcoin and showed it to a small group of crypto enthusiasts, he didn't bother spending time on marketing. He knew that if technology is good, people will come on their own, because the word will spread.
They wouldn't have had the budgets to put into research and development and have the motivation to scale their products and make them cheaper if large amounts of people weren't able to purchase them. In this case, smartphone use wouldn't be possible unless internet connectivity and accessibility weren't widespread, which is also driven by consumer demand.
If a company made a be-all and end-all smartphone, they would go out of business. There always has to be room for more growth and more scalability. People have bills to pay and more things to buy.
I agree that all major innovations start with raw ideas, but they still definitely take human nature into account or they would never succeed. Satoshi had a genius idea because people hate being dependent on things they can't control.
Look at what hatshepsut93 is posting, its evolution and many other things
thrown into the mix. Tech companies are already trying to make their
flagship models the best they can be but its a constant competition.
Tech giants are usually praised as holding complete responsibility for innovation, but you can' t have supply without demand.
People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.
If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.
Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?
People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.
If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.
Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?
This is so far away from the truth.Just read some Steve Jobs interveiws or quotations.He says that consumers just don't know what they want and it's pointless to execute consumer research surveys.
The big corporations can create demand using marketing and advertising,so your point ins't valid.
Totally agree, we want the latest thing which is created by popular brands.
They make the latest versions and people respond.
Technology innovation is a necessity in modern life. Consumers have to learn about innovations related to their work and their field. Companies have almost no responsibility for innovation. Investing in electronic money also requires you to approach new changes.
As far as I'm concerned, companies must focus on developing to meet the needs of the consumer. Therefore to change the trend of continuous development, we must rely on more money. So Bitcoin economy has changed your how you have to understand investing in Bitcoin for the development of its capital for future profitable growth.
I agree. I have this mental thinking tht bitcoin is created to satisfies the need of peopl in which we people are looking forore instant way of investing amd also doing transactions. That is why there is a huge possibility that bitcoin will be the new currency, worldwide currency, because of its characteristics.
I agree to the assertion the assertion that consumers are the ones majorly responsible for innovations.
Companies can only executive the innovations after they must have collected feed backs regarding their products via questionaires.
Companies can only executive the innovations after they must have collected feed backs regarding their products via questionaires.
Well, the companies are the one doing the implementation of the project while the customers are the one giving the idea to the company as to what they should be doing that's why there are surveys always and innovation doesn't stop because there is always a new idea popping up. Even those company giants who are in the top are always doing something new because they cannot sustain their position if they would make people be bored and if they don't offer something new that would make people excited.
They wouldn't have had the budgets to put into research and development and have the motivation to scale their products and make them cheaper if large amounts of people weren't able to purchase them. All major innovations start with raw ideas. But they still definitely take human nature into account or they would never succeed.
Off course the ideas actually comes from the people who are using the stuff around the world. I mean they are the practical user of it and thus they know it better and know very well what should be the modification within the products and services they use. Even when we are with our friends and speaking about any subject then everyone starts giving out their own opinion about it and over the time these are the opinion which becomes the core of new ideas. Soon someone who is into the innovation and techs will capture such ideas and will pass it onto real world desires. Surely this correlation is perfect one.
Tech giants are usually praised as holding complete responsibility for innovation, but you can' t have supply without demand.
People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.
If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.
Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?
Why would you think the consumers are responsible for innovation. Innovation gets into a cycle in big companies and they basically spew out "new" looking old things that is basically not even considered innovation so companies and consumers are not doing anything on that part.People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.
If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.
Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?
If you want to see innovation take a look at the new stuff coming out not the old companies, look at the companies that create new things, for example oculus rift and all the VR stuff in the world started out but moving along very slowly however they are making stuff that makes you "smell" and "feel" with a clothing that will make you get cold or feel hot depending on what you play.
Now, no consumer asked for this, it is of course amazing but we didn't really said "I will only buy if you create this" but they are innovating anyway, why ? Because, they know they can and it would be an improvement. True innovation lies in the creators mind that says "I can make this better".
Companies always create their product and develop them for the consumers. So, in a way, the consumers are completely responsible for all the innovations and newly invented methods that the companies are coming up with.
That's not exactly how it works, technology evolves in many directions. Hardware not only becomes faster, but also more cost-efficient. A decade ago smartphones were for the middle class, today even very poor people in third world countries have them, and functionally there's really not that much difference between them. So, irrational consumerism is not the only reason behind innovation.
Next, if entrepreneurs were only taking existing demand into account, we'd still be living in stone age. All major innovations start with raw ideas without thinking too much about potential users. Satoshi created Bitcoin and showed it to a small group of crypto enthusiasts, he didn't bother spending time on marketing. He knew that if technology is good, people will come on their own, because the word will spread.
Next, if entrepreneurs were only taking existing demand into account, we'd still be living in stone age. All major innovations start with raw ideas without thinking too much about potential users. Satoshi created Bitcoin and showed it to a small group of crypto enthusiasts, he didn't bother spending time on marketing. He knew that if technology is good, people will come on their own, because the word will spread.
They wouldn't have had the budgets to put into research and development and have the motivation to scale their products and make them cheaper if large amounts of people weren't able to purchase them. In this case, smartphone use wouldn't be possible unless internet connectivity and accessibility weren't widespread, which is also driven by consumer demand.
If a company made a be-all and end-all smartphone, they would go out of business. There always has to be room for more growth and more scalability. People have bills to pay and more things to buy.
I agree that all major innovations start with raw ideas, but they still definitely take human nature into account or they would never succeed. Satoshi had a genius idea because people hate being dependent on things they can't control.
Not really the case all the time. For example, in the smartphone industry, we have different phones with different features that some were not influenced by the consumer. We have the notch now in smartphones and apple was the one who started that and some people seem to like it. The bottom line, the responsibility of innovation is neither on the shoulders of consumer nor the company rather they are shared.
I agree to the assertion the assertion that consumers are the ones majorly responsible for innovations.
Companies can only executive the innovations after they must have collected feed backs regarding their products via questionaires.
Companies can only executive the innovations after they must have collected feed backs regarding their products via questionaires.
I guess it works both ways. If the consumers didn't need it then why would the companies innovate new technologies. And sometimes the innovators invent something we didn't even know we needed.
Not necessarily. Take the latest iPhone versions as an example. Did the people demand for AR capability or the Face ID or even the stupid memoji? I don't think so. The company provides technology that they think the consumers need, not necessarily because there's a demand for it.
Tech giants are usually praised as holding complete responsibility for innovation, but you can' t have supply without demand.
People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.
If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.
Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?
By introducing new technologies or products in the market you actually make an virtual need for things.m For example if you have the latest phone model there will be a need for apps, electric charger (car and DC), memory cards, software for the device, and i dont need the accessory that comes with it. The problem is that the tech giants try to make our life too comfortable and at some point it will become a problem reflected in our health. People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.
If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.
Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?
The need creates for more need and it generates the idea. Yes, off course this is completely true that whenever new idea happens to get created in the market then surely someone is always out there who makes it reality and this is where comes an innovation of something and with the time they make it into a technology or product which can be consumed by the consumers who always wanted to have it. The companies are just trying to set the businesses and make their customers happy and thats the goal will always see in any management learnings also.
Companies just provide what their customers need.
They innovate and make researches to provide better services and better products.
It is not a cycle, it is a continuous work and each invention leads to another.
They innovate and make researches to provide better services and better products.
It is not a cycle, it is a continuous work and each invention leads to another.
They do innovation but the ideas for innovation came from the consumers in short. Therefore we can say that the companies only provide what the consume need in order to give satisfaction that is why they thend to do a lot of research and innovate things up.
Tech giants are usually praised as holding complete responsibility for innovation, but you can' t have supply without demand.
People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.
If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.
Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?
People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.
If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.
Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?
You might think it wrong. They are doing that using the consumers money and by getting any suggestion from other people.
Companies just provide what their customers need.
They innovate and make researches to provide better services and better products.
It is not a cycle, it is a continuous work and each invention leads to another.
They innovate and make researches to provide better services and better products.
It is not a cycle, it is a continuous work and each invention leads to another.
This might be the case of some. However, I do think that companies really are one step ahead of the game. That's why most tech giant has this so called "R&D" Department. Primary look for innovations, and of course how they're going to satisfy their customers. And if they did discover new technology, then I'm sure that consumers are going to buy it because its the hottest trend. And it there's no demand, then they can easily created what we call "customer demand" and then the cycle continuous.
Jump to: