If you were well aware of what has happened in recent days, you have not missed the news that the Volkswagen chief did not forgive himself a bit of self-criticism and was not afraid to say that if the car maker could not adapt, they could end up as Nokia.
He goes a little dill the whole automotive industry in Europe. The persistent bullying on the part of the EU and its unattainable limits have affected the complexity and reliability of today's cars so much that people no longer want them so much. The price of used cars is rising and in France you have to be really well secured in order to be able to afford to operate a large family car, because the ownership of such a car pays the state an annual tax that is not small. Solution? Buy an electric car! The left-wing eco-duck will be happy with every European official.
Do not take the example from Nokia
Similar volatility can be seen in the mobile segment and generally across the technology market. And it may not always be governments to throw a pitchfork into some well-functioning business that benefits either from tradition and vast experience, or from being far ahead of the competition.
Herbert Diess, the head of VW, was right about the parallel. The group is currently in the same situation as it used to be Nokia. She cheerfully produced her button phones, which were without a doubt great. Then came a few, at that time a lot of advanced devices, which was not so great anymore. Think of the N90. Have you ever had it in your hand? Yes, at the time it was a peak, it was obvious that the future belonged to devices that could do more than send SMS and make calls.
Unfortunately, none of Nokia realized at the time that it might be a good idea to radically overhaul the controls and take it all a little differently. In Apple, they basically started from scratch and therefore with a completely open mind, without ruts. The buttons hollowed out, put only the really necessary, and everything else was controlled on the large display (at that time) fingers. In short, Nokia, Blackberry, Sony Ericsson, all just stuck and quickly glued their own, half-hearted solutions. Apple had completely changed the rules of the game at that time, people no longer wanted buttons, they wanted big displays, which they could cheerfully cheer with, because it was cool and cool. Nobody actually needed it, but everyone wanted it.
And because history likes to repeat itself, I do not see the future of the group too rosy and I would guess that either really adapts quickly and instead of fleeting phrases and dozens of concepts come real products, or in a few years in solid problems. The rules have changed, and Tesla is the best player to play, which is growing and its products sell great.
The question arises as to who will be the next giant who will start falling from his pedestal. Facebook has a little trouble. Young people do not want it much, they prefer to use Instagram or other “socky”. In addition, all those scandals in recent years have ruined his reputation.
He is a bit rigid, complicated, and has simply swelled to too large proportions and began to offer too many possibilities. That's something ICQ once paid for. Something was sticking to a simple communication program, something over there, and in a moment it was too big, it ate a lot of data, and tasted more and more memory, which, according to old wisdom, is never enough.
The chairs are starting to crack a little even under YouTub. They still hold their number one position, but hyper-correctness and constant tightening of rules are slowly starting to upset the content creator. There has not yet been a great alternative. Twitch has a sticker rather streaming platforms and Vimeo or Dailymotion have been with us for a long time, but they could not build their position. Holt, they don't have Google. All you need is a new player who knows how to reach out to the masses, and YouTube has the birds.
Even Intel cries
Another big player who has had a pretty certain position until recently is Intel. He has long held the number one position on all fronts of his activity. In the server segment, office and gaming computers, laptops and large tablets. In fact, AMD was rifling, which made Intel very effective. Instead of introducing new products that would innovate somehow, he let himself be rocked on a wave of slow evolution and small improvements.
In 2017, Ryzen processors broke into the market and AMD slowly began to take over Intel customers. Instead of brutal single-core performance, AMD offered a different philosophy and offered more cores that put Intel's playfully in its pocket in a multi-threaded test. In applications that were able to take advantage of this, AMD was well above its competitor. And today we are at a point where positions are slowly swapping, and I would say Intel's customers want it to a large extent. His behind-the-scenes practices and manipulation of benchmark results have not helped him as a fair player. In the mid-range segment of graphics cards, by the way, AMD's “evil” nVidia is back by the neck, which will also be interesting to see in the future.
What do you think about how the layout of the technology markets will change in the near future and who will take it first?
Comment Policy: Speak to the topic and be considerate of others.
Comments deemed to be spam, comments of a promotional nature, or vulgar comments will be deleted.