Comments on: Hybrid organizations as market disruptors http://blog.hecker.org/2009/04/23/hybrid-organizations-as-market-disruptors/ Mozilla, open source, and other random topics Sat, 20 Feb 2010 20:07:37 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: CC as a hybrid organization and a tool for hybrids | dv8-designs http://blog.hecker.org/2009/04/23/hybrid-organizations-as-market-disruptors/#comment-811 CC as a hybrid organization and a tool for hybrids | dv8-designs Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:59:48 +0000 http://blog.hecker.org/?p=649#comment-811 [...] and alternative descriptions. Frank Hecker, also of the Mozilla Foundation, provides some critical grounding in the theory of disruptive innovation. Commenter Stephan provides an alternative and also [...] [...] and alternative descriptions. Frank Hecker, also of the Mozilla Foundation, provides some critical grounding in the theory of disruptive innovation. Commenter Stephan provides an alternative and also [...]

]]> By: hecker http://blog.hecker.org/2009/04/23/hybrid-organizations-as-market-disruptors/#comment-650 hecker Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:57:21 +0000 http://blog.hecker.org/?p=649#comment-650 David: NVDA is certainly a low-cost disruptor relative to traditional proprietary screen readers. Typically low-cost disruptive innovations start out as inferior to existing products, and then if successful get to parity or near-parity over time. (Think of minicomputers vs. mainframes, or PCs vs. Unix workstations.) This certainly seems to be a trajectory NVDA could follow. As to whether there's a possible business model for NVDA beyond being funded through grants, I don't know. Of course in general open source projects by their nature have lower costs than traditional proprietary software ventures, but there's still a need to make sure a core of developers is properly funded. Since a lot of screen reader purchases are indirectly paid for by governments, one approach would be to try to get governments to do direct subsidies to NVDA instead -- but I don't know how realistic that prospect is. David: NVDA is certainly a low-cost disruptor relative to traditional proprietary screen readers. Typically low-cost disruptive innovations start out as inferior to existing products, and then if successful get to parity or near-parity over time. (Think of minicomputers vs. mainframes, or PCs vs. Unix workstations.) This certainly seems to be a trajectory NVDA could follow.

As to whether there’s a possible business model for NVDA beyond being funded through grants, I don’t know. Of course in general open source projects by their nature have lower costs than traditional proprietary software ventures, but there’s still a need to make sure a core of developers is properly funded. Since a lot of screen reader purchases are indirectly paid for by governments, one approach would be to try to get governments to do direct subsidies to NVDA instead — but I don’t know how realistic that prospect is.

]]> By: David Bolter http://blog.hecker.org/2009/04/23/hybrid-organizations-as-market-disruptors/#comment-647 David Bolter Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:56:10 +0000 http://blog.hecker.org/?p=649#comment-647 Frank, thanks for this discussion on disruptive innovation. I'd love to read your musings on sustainable disruptive innovation in accessibility sometime. Is NVDA disruptive? How can we make the project sustainable? Frank, thanks for this discussion on disruptive innovation. I’d love to read your musings on sustainable disruptive innovation in accessibility sometime. Is NVDA disruptive? How can we make the project sustainable?

]]>