Why iPad could be a huge success

There have been many comments about the iPad. Many of them, coming form the geekosphere, are rather negative ones, or if positive, with funny excuses, such as comparing the iPad with Chumby. The main drawbacks, listening to many people, are that it is nothing but a too big iPhone; that there is no VGA or equivalent output, which therefore makes it impossible to display slides; that the absence of keyboard, which makes it impossible to use to write text in a situation of mobility, etc.

Yes, it is true, iPad is not a phone, is not a notebook, is not a computer, etc… As a travelling person, I understand iPad is probably not for me, because I want a computer with a big screen, weights nothing, has a big keyboard, broadband access wherever I am and, of course, fits into my pocket.

Because I love contradiction. At the beginning of my carrier, I was a cartographer. I was surprised to see customers who would come, ask for a map of all southern America, and were surprised not to see the little Inca trail they planned to use to walk to Machu Picchu. Yes, mister customer, you can’t have a single map which is both 25.000 and 5.000.000 scale.

Well, you could not, until comes Google Earth. Because Google Earth allows multiple scale, and perfectly answers the question. Drawback is that google earth needs a physical support.

Like many things in life, any travel starts with a dream. Looking at the map is the begining of this dream, then reading books, etc. Where do we dream ? At home, on the couch while drinking a good glass of wine. In our kitchen in the morning while eating our breakfast. In our bed, before falling asleep. Standing up, a good book on a lectern. In our dining room, sharing some interesting content with friends, family, etc. Everything we already do, either with a good book, or with a laptop. But a laptop folded in two parts, always lacking power, too heavy, not easy to both hold and type… Because it is not the computer which comes to ues, it is always us who go to the computer.

Books, books, books. Where do we have books in our home ? Everywhere. Gaorges Perec, in his famous book “penser classer”, show that there are books everywhere in a home, including the toilets. The only place with few books is the kitchen, where interestingly only kitchen books are found.

So the equation becomes clerearer : I want a dream machine which combines the world opening provided by the Internet, the multimedia richness, the hyperlink facility, but with the easiness of manipulation of a book. I dare to say that the iPad perfectly fits to these requierements. We shall all have an iPad at home, at least one and maybe many. It will lay on the couch, sits on the kitchen table, spend the night by our bed. We shall use it to dream about our next holydays, share web sites with our family, read content to our friends, and, I bet, we shall even take it to the toilets. Whoever has seen a friend getting out of the toilets after many minutes, with a book in his hand, may understand this.

The iPad is not a mobility instrument (so why buy the 3G version ?). It is a superb window opened to the world; an unlimited content that will become our home compagnion, our dream support, allowing us to read, surf, share, talk, and many other things, and be part of the house.

I bet it will be a huge success.

Tags:

After Mark Kingdon’s visit to Paris

I had the opportunity to meet, amongst other people, Mark Kingdon, who came in Paris to update on the situation at Linden Lab.

Mark in Paris

He was with Catherine Smith VP marketing, Judy Wade VP Emerging business, and Frank Ambrose VP Global technology.

Mark started with some facts which, even thought they have been published, are worth repeating. Over one year, the number of active users has grown +24%, the number of hours spent have grown +33%, and the number of user to user transaction has grown +94%, and is now around 500 Million US dollars.

The main achievement Mark focused on are :

  • a new web presence
  • an emphasis on social tool aspects
  • emphasis on commerce through the acquisition of Xstreet SL and OnRez
  • back end integration and improved user experience

Linden Lab wants to put more strenght on the product itself, and has hired Tom Hale as product manager (Tom’s avatar is lovely).

In terms of the future :

  • A new viewer will appear beginning 2010. 50 people are working on it. It will be more comfortable and familiar, with a navigation closer to the web. As an exemple, there will be like a browser bar where people will type the name of the Sim they want to go ot. Bookmark facilities will be offered. After this viewer, linden Lab will work on a light one, i.e. a plugin inside the browser, something I never made my mind about. After all, iTunes is not browser based, and has been widely downloaded.
  • The distinction between consumer and professional market will be emphasised as well. There will be different entry pads, in order to differentiate between “those who come for fun, and those who come for a meeting”.
  • There will be more help to the content creator, including the media API, but also possibilities for the creator to sell its products trough a mecanism which will be inspired by iTunes appstore portal.
  • More emphasis will be on the international. As Mark pointed out, 65% of the users are outside the US, 50% of the billing is outside the US, but so far 100% of the technology is inside the US. Linden Lab will open an office in Amsterdam, is looking for an international business development manager, a European Marketing director, and different country managers. Linden Lab also intends to open a data center in Europe (all their data center are in the US so far), and may close an old one in the US to open one in Washington DC, “east of Missisipi” said Frank  (I agree that, for a Californian, east of Missisipi is already abroad). The next viewer will be translated in 15 languages.
  • Not only a new data center will be opened in Europe, but Linden Lab is evaluationg could computing technology, and will offer more flexibility and configuration management tools.
  • More emphasis will be on the economic aspects: 23 payment methods will be introduced, there will be localized cashiers in 20 languages. More important, they plan in the future to have cash out facility. This is something I am not sure to understand, because the paragraph 1.4 of the TOS explicitely says that the Linden dollar is not redeemable. I still believe that a Linden Dollar is, in its philosophy, much closer to a prepaid card than real money.

I was anxious to see how Linden Lab is going to adress the business market. There will actually be two possibilities for business to use the technology.

The first one is to be on the grid, as of now. However, more professional tools will be offered, like registration as an organization, dedicated enterprise registration pathways, entreprise orientation island, offering the possibility to use company’s name for the avatars, the possibility for a company to give (or not) linden dollars, and to welcome guest avatars. The next phase will offer entreprise hub. There will be community gateways, Judy quoted the education pathway made of 6 education commmunities gateways.

The second one is to buy their standalone tool, whose code name so far is Nebraska. 10 alpha customers are using it, including IBM (who will launch a collaborative product very soon, as I have learned in 3DTLC), Intel, Boose Allen, and the US military. The product will be annouced around november, with full technical specification, features, and pricing, and version 1.0 will be public Q1 next year (I know that IBM already did some integration with LDAP server). They did not mention the business model, but they are looking for channel partners to sell the platform. Inside Nebraska, there will be a market place (iTunes like) where users can buy existing content.

With Nebraska, Linden Lab enters a market where products like forterra, protonmedia, teleplace, opensim and vastpark are already existing. It is always difficult for a company to both sell a software, and a service. In any case, 2010 will be a big turn in Linden Lab’s life !

Tags: , ,

Second Life versus Vastpark

I had recently a very interesting conversation with Greg More, from the Spatial Information Architecture Lab at RMIT. Greg is a really innovative person, sees the potential for virtual worlds, and does a lot of interesting projects around spatial data visualisation. Greg and his students have worked with different virtual world platforms.

Greg @ RMIT

Greg @ RMIT

In the middle of the lunch, as I asked him about Vastpark which he uses a lot, he suddenly said “Second Life is like writing in html, Vastpark is like coding in php”.

I found his remark fascinating, especially in the context of corporate companies usages. Collaboration is, so far, the main application of corporate virtual worlds, and both companies have made such announcements. Linden Lab launched its collaborative portal, and Vastpark opened the beta of 3C, its collaborative environment.

So far, Linden Lab has not released a new tool. Their collaborative portal is a marketing campaign aimed at presenting interesting usages of Second Life by corporate companies.

The architecture of SL is quite straightforward : one island is one processor, and users do have a set of tools to create content, which they own. Authentication is performed via a centralized server outside of the corporate firewall, a little bit like a telecommunication operator OSS/BSS.  The client is open source, but not the server. In terms of API, apart from SAP which seems to connect to the reader and not the server, the only open APIs are registration, mapping, search, and some live data. Objects created are stored on the platform, and any duplication is done “manually”.

Well, this reminds me of the first e-commerce sites, where people had to manually transfer the catalogue from a database to full html web page. Pure hard coding. Then, came php, mysql, mashups, javasript, ajax, etc… And, suddenly, life became both much easier, and much richer.

Now, Vastpark. It is an open source product, made of 4 components, all downloadable (with source code as well): the reader, the creator, the publisher, the server. The reader, the creator, and the server are easy to understand. But what is the publisher?

The architecture of Vastpark is totally different: it is a distributed architecture based on components which can sit virtually anywhere. When someone creates an object, this object is published somewhere, and can be retrieve by any server, by any developer. The virtual world which is developed can simply access all the objects created,  in a mashup type logic. Therefore, no need to duplicate elements inworld : duplication of the access is enough, as long as the objects are published (many already are on Amazon S3).

Another interesting point: everything can be described using IMML, an XML type language developed specifically for this purpose. Therefore, objects can be created “on the fly” just like php which generates html on the fly. In fact, it can be done in three ways: through its IMML markup, using a scripting language (LUA is currently supported but more choices will come) and through plugins (plugins may be written in any .Net language: Iron Python, C#, VB, etc). All of these can be written as components of remote widgets that developers can easily embed into their worlds.

In Vastpark, almost everything is a plugin. Voice control is a plugin. Avatar control is a plugin. We could even say that Vastpark is just a network which does interconnect plugins. With this respect, connecting the server to existing content is easy. A connector to Twitter, Flickr, eBay and Skype are already available.

This architecture is much more distributed than SL (who runs three server farms, one in Seattle, one in San Francisco, one in Texas). The partnership with Badumna allows to interconnect in a very efficient manner users world wide distributed.

We can see now the difference in the architectural approach: the component based chosen by Vastpark allows a greater flexibility, and a smoother integration into brand new worlds. As the virtual world projects mature, as more and more virtual world will integrate coorporate companies, this forward thinking approach makes all the difference.

Tags: , , ,

Call for paper on virtual economies

A call for paper on Virtual economies, virtual goods and service delivery in virtual worlds has been posted in the Journal of Virtual World Research.

Link is here : http://editor.jvwresearch.org/?p=62

Deadlines: Abstract – June15, 2009.
Full manuscript – November 1, 2009
Publication Date: December 15, 2009

Guest Editors:
Mandy Salomon, Smart Internet Technology CRC, msalomon@swin.edu.au
Serge Soudoplatoff, ESCP-EAP, Hetic; serge@almatropie.org

First deadline is approaching.
Thank you to disseminate the information, and to submit !!!
Serge

Tags: ,

Facebook and Wilfred Thesiger

Facebook is a fascinating and intriguing phenomenon. Hate and love. On one side, a planetary phenomenon, with splendid growth; and on the other a lot of concern about privacy, and other related questions. If one had to understand the scope of facebook, a look at its wikipedia entry, or, more precisely, at the left colum : how many different wikipedia, in the sense different languages, have an entry about facebook, is impressive : 59 different languages…

There are too many studies about facebook, it is not the point here to recall them. This post started from a very specific remark, coming from a 19 years old person : “one of my professor asked me to be a friend on facebook. I did not feel comfortable, so I declined“.

Very interesting remark, from many perspective. First of all, there are people who can resist the pressure, and those people are 19 years old. Second remark, yes, facebook is about communities. But what is a community ? “I can laugh about any topics, but I cannot laugh with everybody“. When asking why he declined, this person confessed that : “I do not want my professor to see my friends in bathing suits“. There is no problem with being in bathing suit, except one : who is looking at me. It is all about context.

So, what does it mean to be part of a community ? Let me recall about a person who is almost forbidden, Wilfred Thesiger. Interestingly, its french entry on wikipedia is more complete than it english entry. Probably because he was very critic about British Petroleum’s impact on one of his love, the  Rub’Al Khali, the main desert of Saudi Arabia. He was a multi cultural person, born in Addis Abbeba from a father who was the British ambassador, graduated from Oxford, and decided to share simple life with Arabian tribes. He spent four years in the Rub’ al Khali with the nomads. He wrote a superb book out of this experience : Arabian Sands.

In his third crossing of the desert, he had a very interesting conversation with the nomads. Suddenly, one of them asked him, in a very provokative way :”Why do you not convert to Islam?“. Wilfred Thesiger had a superb answer, a single sentence from Quran : “Let God protect me from the Devil“. Superb with two respects: firstly, he told them “I share with you, I have the same life as you, but do not forget that I am different from you”, thus confirming his identity. Secondly, on the syntactic level, by using a sentence from the Quran, he spoke their language. The answer from the nomadic was beautiful : they laughed. It is all about “yes, I am part of a community, but I keep my identity, my personal willing; and therfore, I choose what I do share, and what I do not”. Exactly what this 19 years old person did, by not answering the request to be friend with the professor.

Facebook is a very innovative service, far in advance from many other social networks. But the main issue is the relationship between usage, and technology. This story about confusion in relationships in Facebook is not isolated; many people have experienced it. What we may learn is that it is much more dificult to master facebook than any other social network. Facebook is a very long term tool; a concept not very compatible with the usual short term investment views of United States. This means a very passionate debate to come, a debate about the importance of ethic versus moral.

Tags: , ,

About the french “Graduate response” law

We are, in France, facing a big threat : the introduction of the graduate response bill, a law which would require Internet Service Providers to disconnect subscribers involved in multiple instances of illegal file-sharing (see here or here for some comprehensive understanding). Urgency procedure have been used to avoid multiple discussion and to pass the law as quickly as possible.

I had, before this, sent an open letter to our minister of digital economy. There was a strong response from other people on this topic, and I have been asked to translate its content in English.

You will find in this post the underlying concept of file sharing. These ideas may shed light on “illegal” downloading, and highlight the limitations of the French Government’s proposal.

1) Economy of tangible versus economy of intangible

There is a fundamental difference between a tangible and an intangible economy. The first one is an economy of scarcity, the second one an economy of abundance. Sharing a tangible good means divide it. Sharing an intangible good means multiply it. Therefore, the economic laws which govern the sales of pizza are totally different from the one which govern sell of a music file.

Internet propagates the caracteristics of an intangible economy. However, the content industry is doing its best to go back to an economy of scarcity, first by using DRM (a practice increasingly abandoned), or by applying heavy penalties – even, in some circumstances, imposing jail sentences – to people who have supposedly donwloaded content illegally.

This is the opposite of were the world is heading. Analysis (like this compelling excellent article, in French, by Roberto di Cosmo), show that Internet model creates more money for the artist. We see the emergence of web sites such as sellaband whose goal is to put together artists and fans, in order to allow the latter to invest in the production of a CD, then to be later rewarded by a percentage on the sales. This is not new, Kevin Kelly’s prescient an NY Times article dated 2002, already gave some hints about where was the value shifting. Another excellent analysis, from Sloan Scholl, had shown that Long Tail (which many people confuse with Pareto law) have added another 500 MUS$ revenus to the book industry, just by letting people acess to rare books.

The world is shifting to a peer to peer model (as I have propsed here), wathever the content industry think of it. Instead of projecting themselves in the future, they complain to the government. If the French government protect them, they will die, because history shows us that over protection always has, for consequence, lack of innovation (just like the Egyptian, who refused the alphabet and prefered to increase the power of the scribes, were eventually overtaken by the Greek who decided to  built their society on top of the alphabet as a paradigm shift). How will they die ? Very simple, as new artists are digital natives, and as they understand the value of the peer to peer model as a faster mean to increase awereness of their potential audience, they avoid the old-school industry major. The catalogue of the content industry will therefore shrink, leaving us only with old stars or low quality artists. Not very sexy.

2) Network as the real issue

Internet is a peer to peer technology. It has always amazed me that very few people know the meaning of “A” from ADSL. It is very simple : Assymetrical. ADSL was invented by telecommunication operators, focused on VOD. Of course, for video viewing or downloading, more bandwidth is needed to stream the movie than sending information. For a 12+ Mb/s download, the upload is at most 1 Mb/s.

But, again, Internet is a peer to peer technology. People upload their content on flickr, Youtube, dailymotion, facebook. People write in forums, wiki, they send emails with tons of digital images. Going away from top-down vertical market, Intenet shifts the value in the peer to peer.With this vision, assymetry is a total non-sense.

We need more : as long as bandwith will remain low, usages will not take off. Back in 1997, when I was at France Telecom, Wanadoo had multiply by four teh capacity of a backbone link which was saturated. The link was saturated again 12 minutes later… Optical fiber network is the true crucial issue. No e-health, no e-environment, no e-learning can be properly done with ADSL networks. Our ancestors were able to build electricity down to everybody, the same must be done with fiber optical network.

Above this, the business model is of great importance. Any pay-per-use business model prevents the expansion of usages. In France, we have flat fee, but other countries are still on pay per use. Mobile usage is another example where not all operator undestand the value of flat fee. The roaming data tarif may become outrageous (in some cases, 10 euros per mega transfered !!!). But the telecommunication operator are reluctant to give up such models. Again, what will be the consequence of this lack of innovation in the business model ? As soon as an Internet provider, borne of the Internet culture, secures a a 3G license, s/he will install femtocell on every subscriber modem, and create a 3G network with little investment. Should a community business model (like Fon) sit atop this, then there would be real innovation, and real disruption. It would create a peer to peer based economy, which may prove more robust and more suited to the need of the citizen than any traditional vertical subscription based model.

The world is changing from a vertical flow of goods and information to a market place. Peer to peer is not to be feared, it is the future of many organisation. Rather that setting punishments, the role of government is to encourage, lubricate this dynamic into this market place, because this generates value.

Government should let the traditional economy gently, and concentrate their energies on building high bandwith symmetrical networks, both for fixed and mobile, and framing the creation of value inside this, for the benefit of citizen, and innovative companies.

Tags: , ,

The paradoxe of long tail

I have seen many people, many post, many blogs, talking about the long tail.

It is not my purpose here to explain what the long tail is. Well, it was  not. Until I realized that many people did not understand exactly what the long tail is. To make it brief, many people confuse the long tail with Pareto distribution, or, in a broader sense, Power law. But the paradox is that long tail effect is, in fact, somehow flatening the power law.

Long tail is about something slighty different : long tail is about the size of the catalog. This is visible in the october 2004 original article by Chris Anderson, but it has been mathematically formalized in a paper published in october 2003 at MIT – Sloan School of Management, called “Consumer Surplus in the Digital Economy : Estimating the Value of Increased Product Variety at Online Booksellers“.

What is interesting in this paper ?

First, it states that the size of the Amazon catalog, when it is about books, is about 23 times the size of the Barnes and Noble catalog, and 57 times the size of an independant bookstore. This is true also for CD, DVD, etc…

Amazon has a very interesting sentence : “everyday, we sell more books that we did not sell yesterday than books that we sold yesterday”. This is the opposite of mass marketing, which tends to sell the same thing everyday.

Second very interesting idea : the pareto law still applies, but it moves from 80-20 to roughly 70-30. The distribution tail is growing. This can be seen on table 4, which shows that books after position 250.000 (which means 90% of the catalog) accounts for 29,3% of sales. The tail is flatening.

Third very interesting point: a huge catalog increases consumer spending. In this case, the paper estimates a move from 731M US$ to 1 billion US$.

This was in 2003. What about now ?

Let us make this experiment : let us type ipod in the search engine of some online and brick and mortar store.

  • bestbuy.com : 94 products
  • Amazon.com (electronic department) : 32356 products

Let us search books about ipod.

  • Barnes and Nobles : 141 items
  • Amazon.com : 13926 items.

The size of the catalog keeps on increasing. What would be the impact of this ? Huge customization, community marketing, nich marketing, but, overall, a flatening of the tail. Which would mean somehow the end of power law, the tail would no longer be a tail, the statistical distribution transformed, clusterd into category of products, of course some being more bought than others, but not that much.

How can traditional brick and mortar manage this ? This is the question.

Tags: ,

A new business indicator for enterprise 2.0

Traditional business is usually a vertical one: companies buy raw material, assemble them, and create products and / or services which they deliver to customers. Even Google, one of the most recent powerful enterprise, is following this model : Google buys computers, adds an algorithm, and deliver a set of services (this is of course a simplified vision, but not a wrong one). The innovation of Google relies in its business model: the core service (the search engine) is free, while the peripheral service (advertisment) is paid. But it is not a paradigme shift.

However, there are some interesting little signals of traditional industries moving from this vertical model to another one: an enterprise who manages a market place. Here are a few exemples.

  • A traditional auctioner sells goods to people. Ebay creates a world wide community of people who trade together.
  • A traditional bank loans money coming from its suppliers to their customer. LendingClub, like many other social lending companies (Prosper, virginmoney, zopa, ppdai, dhanax, fynanz, etc..) creates a marketplace where people loan to other people.
  • A traditional major record musics from artists, and delivers it to customers. Sellaband, like many other sites (SliceThePie, spidart, indiegogo, etc…), creates a platform for people to invest into music, or film, and get revenus on the sale of the album, or the movie.
  • A traditionel telecommunication operator buys products to create a network infrastructure to sell minutes, or bandwidth, to customers. Fon creates a marketplace where people do exchange their Internet access.

The underlying business is not yet huge. The social lending market was 647M dollars in the US in 2007. Not big, but it was 269M in 2006; a very good progress. Could this move amplify ? Well, there is no reason it could not, except if traditional businesses, or the regulator (when not the two..) fights againts this; the social lending space has been recently shaked: Zopa is closed in the US, Prosper halts operations, all because of non compliance to SEC regulation. Only LendingClub resists so far.

But I still believe that this move may generalize. I recently discussed with a retail brand who sells food products in many shops over the country. The trend is there: customers want fresh products coming from less than 100 miles away. Well, what happens if, economic crisis helping, people start producing fruits, vegetables, in their own gardens. What happens if the retailers becomes an intermediate between, on one side, his customers-consumers, on the other side, his customer-producers ? He then starts a local market place…

Therefore, I would propose to work on a new economic indicator of a “Enterprise 2.0″ : the ratio of the horizontal money which flows between customers, to the revenue of the company. This indicator shows how many dollars are exchanged between customers in the marketplace for one dollar of revenue.

There is a case where this indicator can be easily computed: when a company earns a percentage of a transaction, the indicator is the reverse of the percentage. If we assume that ebay is a company which earns 2,5% as an average, the ratio is 40.

Linden Lab is another interesting company: if we assume that it generated 40 M dollars of revenu in 2007 (my guess after talking to them), and if we assume the SLifers exchanged 400 Millions dollars, the ratio is 10. Not bad.

On the other side of the scale, a traditional telecommunication operator, though delivering a service which is personal communication between people, is totally unable to generate any financial flux between his customers. I once proposed to a telco to create marketplaces where customers could exchange SMS, or even trade phone minutes. The answer was “are you crazy? We do not want to see a decrease in our revenues”. For telcos, the ratio is zero…

Interestingly, in traditional business, companies who already do trading between customers want a high percentage, therefore a low ratio.

The indicator I propose does not mean a low percentage, but rather the capacity to create a dynamic marketplace between customers.

It is a totally new approach.

Some thoughts about Internet and Innovation

Some times ago, I was doing a conference for Lunch@Circle, a French think tank. And they interviewed me.

It is a condensed form of all my thoughts about the fact that innovation carried by Internet takes its sources on the way Internet was built. Looking at the governance of the Internet enlights the dramatic paradigm shift that we are just starting to experience.

Tags: , ,

The four modes of codesign

Upon the new forms of relationship which are impacted by the Internet, one for sure is the relationship between customers and corporate companies.

One of them is codesign. What is it about ?

Well, since a long time, the passionates have been always keen not only to comment about the product or services, but to participate in their design. As an example, Jellinek cooperating with Daimler-Benz to build the first Mercedes. But this was, somehow, reserved to an elite. However, from the customer side, the desire to participate in the design can be seen in many discussion forums. When Renault officially releases the first pictures of the Logan, it takes only one day to see other versions of the car, using photoshop.

Now, the company side : first was “techno-push”. Products were designed by technical people : from R&D department to design department, then manufacturing, then marketing, then sales. A pure linear process, very long (many years between the first idea and the product on the market), too long for our world. The customer is at the end of the process.

So, marketing has invented the “market-pull”. The customer is at the center, the process is shorter, and, a priori, the customer’s satisfaction is total. Well, not that much, because first the customer is passive, second the process does not take into account technical constraints (what if he wants a teleportation system ?). This process is no more innovative than the first one. Market-pull is no better than techno-push.

Let us have a look at how Internet was built: neither techno-push, nor market-pull, but a constant loop between technical proposition and transformation into usages. This becomes more interesting, an dmore innovative, because this is the standard way mankind has evolved. As shown by the great paleontologist Leroi-Ghouran, since human people have built tools, they always did it on a codesign mode, eliminating useless technology and keeping the one that helps to grow-up. His research allows us to eventually get rid of two bad ideas : technology is God and technology is Devil.

So, I propose to call “codesign” this cooperation between customers and companies, which is hugely helped by Internet. It has various other names, from crowdsourcing to customer as innovator, through user generated content, or pro-am. But let us call it “codesign” as a generic term.

I then started to find all possible ways to cooperate, and I propose four of them :

  • Mode one : the company creates a product, but the customer customizes this product. Well, automotive has extensivly used this since longtime, so no surprise that, in 2008, any respectful automotive web site proposes such an interface. But other sectors are doing this : of course, everybody customizes its computer dashbord, changing colors, etc… But shoes can now be customized; Timberland is a good example of this. Many parameters can be changed, till it comes to the final price (always the same) and delivery time (always the same).
  • Mode 2: the company creates “bricks”, and the customer assembles them. In computer industry, this is what we call widgets, or equivalent. Amazon is a great provider of widgets, and probably one of the most innovative company in terms of relationship between marketing and technology. But other industry as well : the IKEA kitchen planning tool, the Lego factory tool, or any other tool (by the way, IKEA will soon launch a virtual world, but I cannot say more).
  • Mode 3: the company and the customer create together. Open software is a good example, but the Dell idea storm is another beautiful one. The community launches idea, discuss about the ideas, vote for the ideas. So far, nothing unusual. But Dell implements some of those ideas. And this is a great move. Decathlon is doing this too: their R&D center are in some shops, but the use of Internet is limited.
  • Mode 4: the customer specifies, then finds a company to build the product. Of course, it is not one customer, but usually a whole community. There are very few exemple of this, freebeer is probably the most beautiful. Three students from a University in Denmark publish their own receipe of beer under Creative Common license; and they aggregate a community. They eventually find breweries to create their beer, and to sell it. After global breweries, after local breweries, this is a very interesting trend.

This last form is still a low level signal. But, for sure, the internet is reshaping the relationship between customers and companies. Passionates have always existed, but Internet brought them two big differences : 1) their number of friends has exploded, from a few friends to all people who read them on their blog, forums, etc.. and 2) they are now networked, thus forming a interesting innovative layer.

Innovative companies, wanting to enter into codesign mode, should now seriously considering this layer. Mass marketing, and one to one marketing, are gently dying under our amused eyes.

Tags: , ,