News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Tech layoffs more than double in Bay Area by nostrademons on Friday May 13, 2016 @01:07PM (#11691621)
As is often repeated around the tech industry, "Early = wrong". Knowing that mobile became a huge hit in 2010 doesn't really help the folks writing apps for NewtonScript in 1992 or Palm in 2000. WebTV was a specific Microsoft product (that was gonna be huge, it was the next information superhighway!) - it was actually a set-top box more like GoogleTV or AppleTV - and Microsoft benefitted not a bit from YouTube or Netflix's success. If you got the "casual games" part right but missed the "mobile" part, you ended up like Slide, Newgrounds, or Kongregate, all of which are in decline now, usually bought for 2x invested capital or so.
Re:Tech layoffs more than double in Bay Area by uola on Saturday May 14, 2016 @03:06AM (#11694861)
Newsgrounds and Kongregate was "web casual games platforms" not "casual games companies" like King or Zynga. Notch (Minecraft) worked as a programmer at King between 2005 and 2009. The app store didn't exist until mid 2008. Minecraft is in many ways a casual game.

WebTV is in that case not a good "prediction". You have to look at what the premise is and if the product fits the premise. Cheap and easy access to the web is failing because of it's hard to build an ecosystem. Most people don't want to buy, say a chromebook, if something else with the full ecosystem is available at a similar price point.

Re:Tech layoffs more than double in Bay Area by rqebmm on Friday May 13, 2016 @02:08PM (#11692096)
> Knowing that mobile became a huge hit in 2010 doesn't really help the folks writing apps for NewtonScript in 1992 or Palm in 2000.

Which begs the question "were predictions too early, or were early executions insufficient". There are a million examples of first movers who didn't execute. Off the top of my head Yahoo, Blackberry, and IBM OS/2 were first to market for generational techs and then lost.

Re:Tech layoffs more than double in Bay Area by dragonwriter on Friday May 13, 2016 @02:11PM (#11692115)
> Which begs the question "were predictions too early, or were early executions insufficient".

Its not A or B; its A, in part because of failure to correctly anticipate B. Predicting market success is, inherently, a prediction of market participants successful execution.

Re:Tech layoffs more than double in Bay Area by uola on Saturday May 14, 2016 @03:25AM (#11694919)
To succeed you often have to get in early, which means that barrier to entry will be low and competition will be extreme. Plenty of these things didn't fail because they idea failed, but because they got beaten by another company, or a simpler or more advanced technology. I think market success is a higher bar than concept or technology success. Which probably means it is more relevant for discussions (more qualified discussion are better).

I said this in another thread. We know that self-driving cars are gong to be a thing in the future. That doesn't necessarily mean that the effort a company like Google makes today is going to be that valuable. It might be that when full autonomy is ready for mass implementation, we already had cars running around with (much cheaper) sensors for years. Since things like highway autonomy and active safety systems are lower hanging fruit. On the other hand if they gather enough patents and full autonomy explodes in 10 years, they have a good position. There's all this complexity yet most of HN is like "Google is the self-driving company".