Elpub buttonEl.pub Analytic Issue Number 8

Top | Topic News | Topics | Search | Feedback

Digital content RTD perspectives - after the dot.com fall - El.pub Analytic No. 8

Page 5 of 6

  Introduction | Digital content themes | Value chain aspects | Content sectors | Technology
  Business models | To be continued | Comment on this issue of Analytic


In a recent article in IEEE Computer, Bob Colwell writes: "Even engineers sometimes forget that their real job is to drive development technology into new areas, combining past experience with present science to create future products and innovations". Outside of RTD, people often question technology push and suggest that it should be stifled or even stopped. In the market, people will buy products or services that offer some improvement whether it is:

Very few people go out of their way to buy more expensive, less efficient, dangerous or boring products, just because they are from an earlier technical period. The RTD task is to identify how new and emerging technologies can create innovation and improvement. RTD projects must address questions of technical feasibility, cost effectiveness, acceptability and usability. If nothing else, the last few years should have shown us that rushing to market is an expensive and inefficient means of prototyping and testing new services.

Two particular areas of note are mobility and personalisation. In both of these areas, technology opened the way for innovative new products and services. Mobile phones offer an enormous improvement over fixed phones for straightforward voice telephony. In the eyes of some entrepreneurs they also offered the possibility of mobilising other services. An example was the idea that 'the Web' could be provided on a mobile phone. Rather than testing this idea for usability and acceptability, there was a rush to put services into the market. They have failed. Not least because the people who use the Web want bigger better and faster pictures, not tiny black and white slow images. It isn't an improvement. No doubt precisely focussed services for which mobility itself is a major selling point will be developed and will sell; they haven't been found yet. Personalisation is a similar failure. A failure to consider the requirements of the buyer, as opposed to the seller - a familiar problem to software designers - persuaded investors to create systems that offered no evident advantage to the buyer and were rejected.

RTD is needed to match technology to requirements. Generally this means a 'better' paperclip. Entirely new services that are enabled by a new technology, for example the railway at the start of the 19th century and the phonograph at the end, are few and far between. Sometimes the wrong technology is matched (e.g. Zeppelin, steam automobiles).

Back to previous page Forward to next page Return to main index

Page 5 of 6

Comment on this issue

Comments on the content, style and analysis are welcome and may be published; send them to: mailto:ketlux@compuserve.com

Download the WinWord version

URL: download the WinWord document, from: http://www.elpub.org/analytic/analytic08.doc

El.pub News
A free email alerter of the latest news items and associated URLs.
File Downloads - Please note
File downloads from the El.pub site are currently suspended - the links however have not been updated to reflect this. If you would like access to a particular download file - please email webmasters@elpub.org with a suitable request confirming a description of the file you wish to download.

El.pub - Interactive Electronic Publishing R & D News and Resources
We welcome feedback and contributions to the information service, and proposals for subjects for the news service (mail to: webmasters@elpub.org)

Edited by: Logical Events Limited - electronic marketing, search engine marketing, pay per click advertising, search engine optimisation, website optimisation consultants in London, UK. Visit our website at: www.logicalevents.org

Last up-dated: 16 February 2024

© 2024 Copyright and disclaimer El.pub and www.elpub.org are brand names owned by Logical Events Limited - no unauthorised use of them or the contents of this website is permitted without prior permission.