I wonder how any VCR's are still stockpiled somewhere. If those who R&D new toys R smart, why R they stupid?

Question

As science and technology leads us to new products, the electronic and software at an incredible rate, it would seem that the damage caused by fallen industries (because some product just was not the best at that time).....would create alot more turmoil, and loss of jobs/stock market investment. Can anyone give an example of how these R & D in all these companies complement each other, or create new directions instead of destroying them by competition?

Answer 1

The necessary levels of research equipment, devices, or instruments need to be, is directly proportional to the combined levels of new discoveries, and science breakthroughs, no matter how small. The advancement of knowledge, most of which benefit the "Team Human populate the Universe" concept, requires a perpetually increasing need for refined data, which subsequently makes the R & D equiptment
and instruments, an integral part of knowledge itself. Hardware and software actually become obsolete at a "lesser" rate than incidental, or accidental uses and/or discoveries are stumbled upon. Consider how spilled popcorn seeds that began popping, during an unrelated microwave experiment, led to the common household microwave oven industry. This would be accidental advancement. The rubber used for wheelchair seats, as well as wheels, the subsequent result of NASA's need to make durable comfortable padding for astronauts. This obviously an incidental pathway, both types become multiple pathways of industry. Both of these examples combined wouldnt seem on the surface, to be the cause of obsolescence, unless you were part owner of the (now inferior) wheelchair company, with your retirement
stocks tied up in "Toaster Oven Inc."

Answer 2

The people who make these products realize that they have a limited lifetime before something better comes along and makes them obsolete. Competition inevitably creates winners and losers. Smart companies develop the competition for their own products, or if they miss, try to buy the technology. Stupid companies try to resist change and eventually get overrun. IBM initially tried to resist the development of both the electronic computer (would be bad for their mechanical tabulator business) and later, the PC (bad for the mainframe business). In both cases they were basically tricked into developing the products by perceptive people within the company. In recent years you can see how the music industry has suffered by being behind the curve in embracing electronic distribution.

On the other hand, you will notice that the folks who make DVD players now are the same who made your VCR. Some of them, though, look like they will lose out as video distribution moves away from physical media.

There is a lot more to this than just the technology of course. Companies like Microsoft can throw their weight around and dominate markets for reasons that have little to do with having the best product. IBM played a similar game in its day.

Answer 3

What makes you think the VCR market is dead.
I just replaced one of my old VCR's.
More than anything right now I use it to transfer family VCR tapes to DVD's, via a DVD recorder, but considering the life to be expected from a DVD when compared with a VCR tape, I sure am not getting rid of any of my tapes after transferring them.
Also, a VCR is much easier for my grandchildren to use. Just slip in the tape and hit the play button. Compare that with with what a small child would have to know in order to get a DVD disc going.
When a new product is introduced to the market, it takes many, many years for that product to get to the point where it begins to dominate older, existing technology. It is estimated that less than 30% of home computers are connected to a broadband service today, after all the years that broadband has been marketed, and digital TV would not be advancing as fast as it is if the government hadn't gotten involved in shutting down analog signals on a set schedule.

Answer 4

How did you know you needed a VCR before they came out? How did you know you needed something better before DVDs came out. Obsolete R and D is simply a matter of learning what is be best product. You can't come out with a 10GB DVD until you have mastered the 750MB CD technology. And the consumer was happy with 750MB for the time being, and now is happy with the 3.5GB DVD until something better comes out.

It takes time, and all along the way the efforts of R&D are strewn along the wayside making room for the next generation.

Your mother didn't throw out the oldest child because she got it better with the last! It took training to be able to better help the last child.

Maybe she should have... :-)

Answer 5

I question your perspective on how companies and the market operate.

As someone told me once, "Large companies cannot think". Yes. Believe it or not. Large companies do not like thinkers. They are politically dangerous.

So, how does a big company become bigger? Not through research and development, but by absorbing and railroading smaller companies.

Tell me one original piece of software that Microsoft brought to the market, and I will tell you it is the exception to the rule.

You surely must have heard the story of Philo T. Farnsworth, credited with inventing TV, and was granted a patent for it. How much do you think that patent was worth? Nothing if you asked RCA, who fought him tooth and nail in court. Although RCA eventually lost, Farnsworth was never given the credit nor the fortunes of his effort, which was absolutely titanic.

Not to mention Níkola Testa, credited with developing power systems and the induction motor as we know them today. He died in a SRO hotel in New York, destitute. The patent office even stripped him from his wireless patents, to re reverse itself in the 1980´s, long after his death in 1947.

Perhaps nobody has abused the patent and copyright laws and railroaded more companies than M$.

Yes. Competition destroys, but it is a David vs. Goliath story. And Goliath is winning.
.

Answer 6

in the beginning, no longer 'each' boy thinks that they are smarter than women. sure few of them think of and out of your question it fairly is obtrusive that diverse the adult males around you're like that. Now, what's the defination of 'smart'? in my opinion i think of girls are sturdy and useful, in addition they have greater endurance than adult males yet someway they lack the inventive mind's eye. you will see, the variety of male scientists, painters, action picture directors, authors etc is often greater than lady opposite numbers. yet that doesnt advise that lady are no longer sharper, it purely ability that nature has made lady this style of way that they experience greater mushy in supportive roles.