NewAtlantis wrote:"Companies that once revolutionized and dominated new industries – for example, Xerox in copiers or Polaroid in instant photography have seen their profits fall and their dominance vanish as rivals launched improved designs or cut manufacturing costs.
Xerox didn't develop xerography. They bought it, patented it, left it in the cupboard for more than 20 years and were astonished to see it making loads of money when they finally decided to release it. Polaroid never developed anything new after the kludge they called instant photography.
In technology the cassette tape replaced the 8-track, only to be replaced in turn by the compact disc, which was undercut by MP3 players, which will in turn eventually be replaced by newer technologies. Companies which made money out of technology which becomes obsolete do not necessarily adapt well to the business environment created by the new technologies."
Companies don't adapt at all. Unless there is a compelling reason to do so. If they detect their downfall before it is too late, they might adapt. Most don't because they aren't led by inventors, or even people who understand technology. They are led by people who understand the shareholders' mindset. And that's dangerous. It creates nothing new, because creating means risk taking. Something shareholders want to avoid at all cost.
The biggest danger to innovation is the patenting system. The big boys will patent anything. Without really developing anything, since that is deemed to expensive. And that is a serious hindrance to innovation.
The Raspberry could be disruptive technology. But only history will tell...