views:

675

answers:

20

At the company that I work we have a successful software product that did well but is now obsolete and unmaintainable. I am trying to explain that you need to innovate and replace this product with new offering in order to survive. I am looking for some good examples of companies that made the mistake that we are close to making - relying on one successful product way over it's normal lifetime, so I could use it as illustration when making an argument.

These products need not be software, emblematic cases that illustrate well this situation but where product was not software are also appreciated.

+19  A: 

Netscape. Complete stack - from Web server and other server side software (THAT was crappy) to the browser that got technically sideballed by Microsoft (and no - the windows integration was AFTER they actually won the war).

I was there at that time (working as IT consultant) - Netscape's web browser went from "NICE" to "BLOATWARE" in the time MS IE went from "damn, what a crap" to "actually better than Netscape".

Then Netscape started to totally rewrite their stuff - which meant YEARS without a new version.

TomTom
Strangely Microsoft didn't learn from that. They didn't improve IE 6.0 for years, thereby allowing Firefox take a huge chunk of their market share. Though they didn't go bankrupt. :)
Mark Byers
Actually STILL a perfect examlpe. MS got sneaky (IE bundling) way after netscape lost. Then MS totally stopped (disbanding the IE team) and got owned by others. Innovation IS key.
TomTom
Just looked at Netscape Navigator timeline. Doesn't seem like they didn't try to innovate, they just failed. For example, it took a lot less time to go from version 3 to 4 than it took to go from 1 to 2:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_timeline
Dan
PERFECT example! They had all the market share, then tried to innovate and it took too long and they lost it all!
Brian T Hannan
@Mark Byers: It helps to have billions and billions in the bank along with your fingers in lots of different pies.
Chris Lively
JWZ:`We changed the world [...] in 1994 and 1995. What we did from 1996 through 1999 was coast along, riding the wave caused by what we did before. Why? Because the company stopped innovating.` http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nomo.html
Remus Rusanu
+12  A: 

VisiCalc for the Apple II was the first spreadsheet program (i.e. 100% market share) and is considered by many the killer app that made owning a computer important for business rather than as a hobby. In that sense, it paved the way for the PC, yet failed to make the transition to that platform well, and was supplated by Lotus 1-2-3 and later Excel.

WordPerfect was for a time the dominant word processing app. It fell prey to a delayed and low-quality move from DOS to Windows.

Michael Borgwardt
not only the product failed (long term), but also the book "Almost Perfect" on WordPerfect: http://www.wordplace.com/ap/
devio
WP: That was not low quality, that was Microsoft sabotage. There's a difference.
Stephan Eggermont
Bollocks. WP for Windows was low quality, and did a terrible job of importing WP for DOS documents. (Not that WP for DOS was all that great, either; WP 5.0 had the "patch of the week" for months after RTM.)
Eric Brown
+3  A: 

I guess examples can be found in the (fast moving) gaming industry.

Some companies try to uninspiringly keep selling iterations of a once successful franchise (and releasing horrible sequels in the process).

A known company would be the once big Midway filing bankrupcy ; they were behind the long-running Mortal Kombat series (whose first entries are iconic in many aspects).

ChristopheD
I remember Mortal Kombat. I used to frequent the arcade and I remember when "Mortal Kombat 2" was released, you had to stand in line for a while to play it. Each successive release seemed to draw fewer players and have shorter lived popularity.
Rice Flour Cookies
+2  A: 

Palm -- you can't even hotsync with a 64-bit OS. If they had turned it into a phone .. what would be the difference between that and the iPhone?

Larry Watanabe
You mean Palm's webOS phone business that HP just bought?
Donnie
What about the Treo?
Benjamin Oakes
I think he's talking about the Palm Pilot range of devices that were popular with business users back in the 90s/early 00s
djhworld
+6  A: 

Polaroid seems like another good example. The advent of digital imaging and photography just passed them by.

Greg Harman
+5  A: 

In a word: Evolution

Like every other aspect of life in the world around us, those which cannot adapt, become extinct. Companies, and the people that work for them, are no different. Ignore this at your peril.

Dave
+7  A: 

MySpace. Not quite bust yet, but the party's been over for awhile.

x1a4
True. And Facebook's next, because they keep innovating for profit, rather than for their users.
dimo414
+2  A: 

Facebook is going to have problems soon if they don't change their privacy issues. Facebook also has issues with their interface being worse than it once was. Notifications don't work right. The feed is real wacky.

MySpace and Friendster didn't change fast enough prior to Facebook. Especially MySpace. I don't know what they were thinking with their bloated ad-corrupted interface for so long. They've made a nice adjustment now going for bands and such, but they could have been the dominant player.

Jeff
+12  A: 

In a word: 3DFX

They had a good product but failed to innovate like their competitor, Nvidia.

George Edison
I was going to mention 3DFX, but you beat me to it. I remember that preceding their decline, they wanted to set themselves up as a proprietary vendor that customers would be locked into a la Microsoft Windows. You may remember "Glide", their proprietary 3d library that competed with OpenGL and Direct3D. They sued Creative Labs when they came up with a Glide compatibility wrapper for their hardware. They wanted to see software created that would only run on their hardware.
Rice Flour Cookies
+3  A: 

I see WordPerfect has been mentioned, but there's an even better example: MicroPro.

They developed WordMaster, the first ever Word Processing software, and then WordStar, which was incredibly successful for DOS.

What happened? Windows 3.0 came out. It became popular - ubiquitous, even. MicroPro didn't seem to notice or care. They didn't bother developing a Windows version. They didn't innovate. Eventually they bought and rebranded some other word processing software - but it was too late, Microsoft Word was already out.

Ask the average teenager or even twenty-something today; I doubt that any of them have ever heard of MicroPro or WordStar. They went from having one of the most important products ever made, to bust, simply because they waited too long to update their product suite.

Aaronaught
+10  A: 

Happens to search engines a lot. In the beginning I used Altavista a lot, then Yahoo a bit and now only Google. Might be switching to Yahoo back soon though.

Experts-Exchange isn't what it used to be. The better alternative (SO) is used a lot more (based on my own search results in Google).

ICQ, replaced by MSN Messenger (in our country).

We've also had this problem in the company I'm working at the moment. We had quite a good CMS (well, a bit more as a CMS, but let's keep it basic). In the years we maintaned and sold it, we always build new stuff in it, but based on the old architecture. Now it's grown so big that no one of us can maintain it anymore (original devs gone and no documentation). That's why we offer alternatives using Sharepoint now.

Jan_V
+1 for experts exchange, I lol'ed
BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft
When Google went public I told people it was a bad investment because all they had was one product, and if someone ever came up with a better search they would be toast. I no longer give investment advice.
Bremer
+2  A: 

Companies get bought, products get recycled, renamed, etc., so all depends on the meaning of "going bust". Companies like Novell, Borland, Corel come to mind, but they still seem to exist, though not as important as they used to be.

Pick your favorite from wiki categories Defunct software companies and Companies disestablished in....

devio
+3  A: 

DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) pretty much invented the minicomputer with the PDP and improved on it with the VAX. However, Alpha notwithstanding, they pretty much put all their eggs into the minicomputer basket and (ironically) missed the PC revolution (and when they did try selling a personal computer they went the wrong way). Granted that's a bit of an oversimplification. They were only "saved" by selling themselves.

GreenMatt
I remember that one... I had the "joy" developing software for the PRO-350 for a while. Basically, a PDP-11 tossed into a desktop box with a forms and menu based UI. DEC produced some of the most innovative mini-computers and operating systems, but they really crashd badly on the desktop. But, hey, I don't think this is the message Dan is looking for! He needs a failure-to-success scenario, this one went the wrong way, which is the other side of the innovation coin.
NealB
@NealB: Thanks for the comment. Maybe you're correct about what Dan wants, but my understanding is that Dan wants examples of companies that had success with one product/line but then failed to go beyond that product/line and went under due to that failure. If that understanding is correct, I think DEC qualifies.
GreenMatt
+1  A: 

Digital Equipment Corporation, they dominated the mainframe market with PDP-11's and other similar machines, but they failed to switch to the market of PCs, and in 1998 they were toast. Similar fate befelled SGI.

whatsisname
Perhaps I'm being too picky, but DEC made [minicomputers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minicomputer), not [mainframes](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainframe_computer).
GreenMatt
+11  A: 

Sad but True: Borland.

They had a great product (Delphi) and put no innovation in it for about 7 or 8 years. Now they sold it to Embarcadero and they try to rescue what is left.

Sebastian P.R. Gingter
+1  A: 

Have them read The Innovator's Dilemma, by Clayton Christensen - an entire book describing why companies need to replace/cannibalize their own products, before someone else does.

John C
+2  A: 

Not really an innovation failure, but a management failure, Commodore was the first to show a personal computer, the first to deliver low-cost computers to the masses, the first to sell a million computers, and the first to arrive with a true multimedia computer. If they had played their cards right, they could have been today’s Apple.

Bremer
Amiga rulez! If the companies that acquired it didn't went bankrupt and took advantage of the product and innovate on it, it would be today's Apple **^ 10**. Such a waste of technology.
stagas
+1  A: 

As you might have read, Apple surpassed Microsoft recently (market value). The culprit? According to the article:

"It's more than just Mac versus PC," said Yair Reiner, an analyst at Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. "The market sees Apple as an engine of innovation and growth, but with Microsoft, the vast majority of its profits come from products that been in the market for a long time."

"Microsoft has been the workhorse of the PC revolution, but it's seems that horse is running out of new tricks."

You just have to check the stock price comparison for both companies, and you will see that while Microsoft remained stagnant for TEN FREAKING YEARS, Apple, Inc. started growing rapidly in the later part of 2004. Now it is the bigger player.

Arrieta
A: 

SGI

They essentially founded the 3D graphics industry. Then they started sitting back on their laurels and spent the past 15 years withering. Recently their last remaining assets were sold off for peanuts.

Alan
+1  A: 

I think Blockbuster is a good example of this, albeit not a software company (but that might be more apt for your audience). They dominated the market for years, but it was just the same product and service. Then comes along a new company (Netflix) with a fresh take on movie rentals, and now Blockbuster is all but dead.

Dave
RedBox has also found a way to exist in the void left by Blockbuster, but not quite filled by Netflix.
dacracot