Aug 2006
Cyclical innovation
Tuesday - August 29, 2006 Filed in: Strategy
| Venture
Capital
This may be my most unexpected subject: Microsoft's
good side. As a forever Mac user I am not a big
proponent of the demi-cartel position Microsoft
instills on the computer industry, yet I realize that
at the same time Oracle pursues a cartel in the
database business and Apple is driving for a cartel
in the music business. So all the major players
deploy the tactics that suit their success in the
market. C'est la Vie.
But my recent observations of Microsoft are very positive. Today I read the XBOX people are prepping tools for individual game designers to build their own games. That is big. Big as in free-markets. The free supply and demand characteristics of free-markets are brought to the gaming industry, absolutely beautiful. Microsoft will be a winner through an effective platform on which both the supply of the Long Tail and the Body (main stream supply) of the gaming market thrive.
Also, interesting has been the personal experience with Microsoft, especially the entertainment group. I am currently positioning a Venture Company portfolio company to Microsoft (full-body gesture recognition), and within less than two weeks they respond, call and are prepared to setup a meeting. Companies like Apple, Sega and many others can learn something from this agile behavior of a big gorilla. Microsoft is truly changing.
But my recent observations of Microsoft are very positive. Today I read the XBOX people are prepping tools for individual game designers to build their own games. That is big. Big as in free-markets. The free supply and demand characteristics of free-markets are brought to the gaming industry, absolutely beautiful. Microsoft will be a winner through an effective platform on which both the supply of the Long Tail and the Body (main stream supply) of the gaming market thrive.
Also, interesting has been the personal experience with Microsoft, especially the entertainment group. I am currently positioning a Venture Company portfolio company to Microsoft (full-body gesture recognition), and within less than two weeks they respond, call and are prepared to setup a meeting. Companies like Apple, Sega and many others can learn something from this agile behavior of a big gorilla. Microsoft is truly changing.
Microsoft is getting it!
I couldn't help but chuckle when I read today's
updated report on the Secure Content Management (SCM)
market by number-cruncher industry analyst IDC. Having
dealt with some of the companies in the top ten
of that report, I can tell you that the numbers
they report to IDC are not only incorrect but
paint a picture of growth and penetration that
could not be farther from the truth.
Yet, investors and entrepreneurs use this data to engage in new ventures together. Business partners base their strategic picks on it. Customers bet their careers on it. Even the suppliers (of SCM solutions) use this data to prove to their business unit managers how much progress they've made; what was the last time you got away with writing your own report card?
The problem with the IDC analysis is that it pretends to show what the size of the market is, and the operators in it, by simply adding the sum of finagled realizations. But what about the size of the total addressable market? A top down analysis of the market means nothing if it doesn't intersect with a bottoms up analysis (how applicable this technology is to the market). How many computers could be protected with SCM versus how many are? Is the sum of realizations really equal to the sum of opportunities? I don't think so. There is plenty of opportunity for SCM vendors that think different.
So, not only does the analysis of the opportunity stink, the facts are doctored too. Let's be real, Secure Content Management is a bull market with room for 130 competing vendors, sounds like no-one has cracked the code yet. Entrepreneurs should approach security from a new perspective that crosses artificial boundaries defined by the major players, let us know if you need help.
Yet, investors and entrepreneurs use this data to engage in new ventures together. Business partners base their strategic picks on it. Customers bet their careers on it. Even the suppliers (of SCM solutions) use this data to prove to their business unit managers how much progress they've made; what was the last time you got away with writing your own report card?
The problem with the IDC analysis is that it pretends to show what the size of the market is, and the operators in it, by simply adding the sum of finagled realizations. But what about the size of the total addressable market? A top down analysis of the market means nothing if it doesn't intersect with a bottoms up analysis (how applicable this technology is to the market). How many computers could be protected with SCM versus how many are? Is the sum of realizations really equal to the sum of opportunities? I don't think so. There is plenty of opportunity for SCM vendors that think different.
So, not only does the analysis of the opportunity stink, the facts are doctored too. Let's be real, Secure Content Management is a bull market with room for 130 competing vendors, sounds like no-one has cracked the code yet. Entrepreneurs should approach security from a new perspective that crosses artificial boundaries defined by the major players, let us know if you need help.
The industry-analyst cookbook
Friday - August 11, 2006 Filed in: Security
So who is not paying attention here?