Innovation

SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.

Popular Topics

Home

Members

Calendar

Who's On

Home » SQLServerCentral.com » Editorials » Innovation

13 posts, Page 1 of 2

1 2 »»

Innovation

Rate Topic

Display Mode

Topic Options

Author

Message

Steve Jones - SSC Editor

Posted Thursday, May 22, 2008 11:28 PM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 9:03 PM
Points: 31,406, Visits: 13,723

Comments posted to this topic are about the item Innovation

Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help

Post #505618

jay-h

Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 6:44 AM

Say Hey Kid

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 7:38 AM
Points: 685, Visits: 1,706

Innovation is very important, but also is application of innovation. Some companies have come up with terrific innovations, but never applied them constructively in a product. Personally it's immaterial whether a company grows innovations in house, or purchases them outside... the fact that the see the innovation and realize how to utilize it that is important.

...

-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --

Post #505800

GSquared

Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 7:06 AM

SSCoach

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, May 06, 2013 1:09 PM
Points: 15,439, Visits: 9,569

I think both matter, pretty much equally.

- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread

"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon

Post #505810

David Fisher-415435

Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 7:39 AM

Forum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, July 14, 2008 6:14 AM
Points: 8, Visits: 31

The industry's and the public's obsession with "innovation" is foolish. Take 90% of the energy expended on having the newest gizmo or gimmick and invest it in improving long-term reliability, and we'll all be better off...all of us other than those whose livelihood turns on pushing product obsolescence to ever-greater extremes. The kind of innovation that has long-term value will occur; it cannot be suppressed. What is needed, throughout the economy, is greater reliability, and this includes people as well as products.

Post #505850

Matt Miller (#4)

Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 8:11 AM

SSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 1:56 PM
Points: 6,997, Visits: 13,941

I'd agree with GSquared. You need both, and both are equally important. You need the innovators to push things along, give us better solutions, and you then need the implementors/distributors to take on applying the breakthroughs to concrete applications (or package said innovation for the masses). And, from what I've seen, truly rare is it that a single person/organization can do both well.

I can't say I think things get better by lowering copyright lengths/patent standards though. If anything, in my mind, that's a step in the wrong direction. Innovation is a very costly and dangerous/speculative business, so helping big organization come in and scoop the innovation, essentially short-sheeting the innovator in the process, essentially discourages innovation. You can't disregard the cost/value that went into coming up with something just because we want to have it cheaply: it devalues all of the hard work that was put into the process, often with no guarantee that it would work in the end.

I do see the current system for protecting and claiming your IP as at least partially broken though, so I'm not sure what the ultimate answer is.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?

Post #505882

Robert Hermsen

Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 8:32 AM

SSC-Addicted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 10:42 AM
Points: 455, Visits: 747

Controlled innovation is key if a company wants any new customers. It is also key to retaining old customers. If a product is developed and never changed either it was a golden ticket done perfect the first time (Cough Cough) or it was for a very limited scope. When looking at enterprise class applications customers want growth in products. Don't get me wrong they want the basics and they want it to work but competition will steal them away with features. The controlled part is important as if all you do is change your product you never ensure the old features work solid and yes you have the most features but your basics may not be great. I think that you should have a group in every company doing the forefront inovative thinking taking ideas from others within and running with them.

Post #505902

jburkman

Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 9:42 AM

SSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, July 20, 2012 2:13 PM
Points: 38, Visits: 219

Seems like maybe innovation, as used here, is being muddled a bit with R&D. Innovation is the end result - and arguably the implementation - of a successful R&D outcome (imho). So innovation *is* the bringing to market of the idea. Then there's that next layer of pushing, expanding, growing the innovation (whatever that is called).

Microsoft seems to perform at this unnamed second layer, of aggregating innovations (like SeaDragon) and finding some great synergies with other products. Then pushpushpush shoving innovations to a largely captive market.

Can't happen without innovation, which can't happen without research. And I personally prefer the natural selection lifecyle of new innovations that are never pushed (pick any one of a number of great open-source applications) over the "aggregate and stuff" business.

Microsoft seem to less often "bring" us a product, as they do put us in a position of eating the new dish on the table or walking out of the dining room altogether.

Research ftw.

2 cents, ymmv.

Post #505981

Tomm Carr

Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 12:27 PM

Mr or Mrs. 500

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:14 AM
Points: 501, Visits: 783

Marketing or innovation? Chicken or egg?

Not so much "which came first?" as "which depends more on the other?" The answer, of course, is "yes."

To give Microsoft and other such companies their due: successful marketing requires its own innovation.

Tomm Carr
--
Version Normal Form -- http://groups.google.com/group/vrdbms

Post #506086

Anipaul

Posted Saturday, May 24, 2008 7:39 AM

SSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, May 16, 2013 2:50 AM
Points: 4,785, Visits: 1,334

Innovation is the most important thing no doubt but just think if other people do not able to know that innovation then can we call it a INNOVATION. No it has to be known to other people or you can say it has to made usable/popular to mass.

CREDIT TO MICROSOFT FOR MAKING AN TECHNOLOGICAL INNVATION (by other players) POPULAR (by copying those innovation).

Post #506238

Manie Verster

Posted Monday, May 26, 2008 12:01 AM

Ten Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:01 AM
Points: 1,151, Visits: 878

Innovation is important because we need to continuously grow and find out knew things. The human mind is and should always be curious of what we can do to better our world always. Though, we cannot all be innovators but each of us got our own talents. In this case some will innovate and others will market and therefore marketing is also important as long as we don't steal each other's innovations because that could kill innovations and we won't have new things to interest us anymore.;););)

Tongue

Manie Verster
Developer
Johannesburg
South Africa

Life is about choices.... I choose to be happy today

Post #506379

« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

13 posts, Page 1 of 2

1 2 »»

Permissions