NYT says India’s pace of IT innovation slow. How is Pakistan doing?

[HariSeldon]

This is sort of my argument as well.

If we develop something that addresses a business need, using the Microsoft's .net platform, using Visual Studio n all, that's pretty good as a solution, however what would be considered good computer science is to develop the technology necessary for developing business applications.

As I have clarified several times in this thread, the context of this discussion is product innovation which is relevant in a business context. We are not talking about advancements in the science of computing ala Edsger Dijkstra or Alan Turing.

Can you guys decide what the context of this thread....CS or Product?

 

[TechLahore]

Again you are shifting goal post and this is not taking us anywhere. You said Product and I asked abt Product and you talked abt patents which is again bring us back to CS which not in term-of-reference for this discussion. And Patents? You said ur not intrested in "Microsoft is Stupid and Evil discussion " I am not either. But spare me this patents stuff. We know what is the innovation in 90% of patents they are defensive rather than some innovation. Give me the products where innovation has earned them kudos.

Save me the trouble and read my entire response. What part about Bayesian network implementations for speech recognition (Office feature) and Project Natal for Xbox do you not get? These are two small examples I quoted previously. You want us to believe that Microsoft has never innovated despite having some of the brightest people on the planet working at Microsoft Research? We should believe you because you are brighter and more accomplished than Nathan Myrhvold and Rick Rashid... gimme a break!

I will ask again what are the innovation of Big companies. (And leave Apple out. We have yet to see Apple post SJ. Even OS that SJ was working (I think its name was NeXT) was supposed to be ground breaking. Whatever happened to that.)

Biggest innovation in OS is of GUI and mouse. 99.99% of crowd does not even the name who innovated this. (Nope not Apple)

Yes, no big company has ever innovated. DuPont has never invented new materials used by billions. IBM and DEC never pioneered the mainframe industry. Xerox never invented graphical computing.

What sort of ridiculous alternate reality are you living in?

And again why you want to measure somebody on your scale. We all have 24hrs in a day. Any management has limited bandwidth. These companies are growing @ 10-15% per annum. By this time next year top 3 will be adding 1bil/Q. These comp are not on auto pilot. This growth has to be managed. (BTW these companies do have products. But they address the niche market so not many are aware about them.)

If by my scale you mean a repeatable product model with high margins and ability to scale exponentially independent of further similar human capital inputs, and the ability to command massive brand equity beyond anything service companies are able to command, then YES. I am measuring them on my scale. Which also happens to be the scale of better business models.

And central position, emotions??? whoa....wait right there...this is abt money sire.... keep emotion out of this. I am not sure if they still trade the shares of Netscape or if new licenses are getting issued for Lotus notes. Apple OS is more respected but Windows earns the buck. Business is business.

Perhaps you aren't familiar with the notion of brand equity. The most valuable brands are measured by people's emotional affinity for them, which translates into money. Take a look at the most valuable brands and tell me how many product vs. service companies exist on the list.

You are so far from the mark in not getting the point that I tire of responding...

Product earns big bucks but you can become obsolete overnight. Product is not about innovation only. Specially IT products. What you will call Youtube. Google has to buy it and shut its own video service. After doing everything MS is still not able to make dent in search market.

YouTube is a product delivered online. You are confusing SaaS - which is simply a different way of delivering a PRODUCT - with implementation services that require human resources to scale.

Bing was on a $400M revenue trajectory as of July last year and that would translate into a $4-5B market cap were it a standalone company. For Microsoft that's small, but to dismiss it would be foolish.

And I think it's highly disingenuous to quote examples of products that haven't done well in your book. What the heck is that supposed to prove? The fundamental differences between low margin body shop services that require more people to scale, and high margin product companies that can scale almost independent of human resources are glaring and obvious. I am sorry if you can't fathom them.

Frankly you are getting confused between having Product and being innovative. These are 2 different things. Indian IT comps are innovative in what they are doing and they donn't have any big-hit-top-of-mind-recall product.

I understand that you don't get it... I think there's no point you and me discussing this further. If you can't understand that a single product company - take Google, Microsoft, Cisco, HP etc. - has a market cap 5-10 times India's IT industry size, and if you can't understand that product margins are far higher than service margins (Yes, "sire" it is about money - and the bottom line is profitability/margins), or that product companies form the core of the IT industry around which service companies develop their practices, then I can't do anything for you. You are welcome to your views.

 

[masijames]

any indian or pakistani IT company products picture ?

 

[HariSeldon]

Save me the trouble and read my entire response. What part about Bayesian network implementations for speech recognition (Office feature) and Project Natal for Xbox do you not get? These are two small examples I quoted previously. You want us to believe that Microsoft has never innovated despite having some of the brightest people on the planet working at Microsoft Research? We should believe you because you are brighter and more accomplished than Nathan Myrhvold and Rick Rashid... gimme a break!

Are you are confused or there is some other motive..
This is what you said to be prev

As I have clarified several times in this thread, the context of this discussion is product innovation which is relevant in a business context. We are not talking about advancements in the science of computing ala Edsger Dijkstra or Alan Turing.

Now you are going-on abt tech and patents. Make up your mind. MS office is not getting sold for speach recog. Biggest innovation in Game world is done by Ninetendo. In my book 90% is 90%. I am not saying that they not done anything in tech, but I context of Product Innovation...Innovation that made there prod sale.

Yes, no big company has ever innovated. DuPont has never invented new materials used by billions. IBM and DEC never pioneered the mainframe industry. Xerox never invented graphical computing.

What sort of ridiculous alternate reality are you living in?

Xerox...thats what I said in my prev post if you have tried to read...They innovated GUI but company minting money because of that is MS.

THere is diff between Innovating and having a hit prod.
And Dupont....oh so want to talk abt India as a whole know. Know I know what you trying to do here.

If by my scale you mean a repeatable product model with high margins and ability to scale exponentially independent of further similar human capital inputs, and the ability to command massive brand equity beyond anything service companies are able to command, then YES. I am measuring them on my scale. Which also happens to be the scale of better business models.

Well who cares abt what you think. These companies are minting money. They are not bothered abt what you or me think or say. They see the opportunity and they run with it. They are one making money not those who are talking.

Perhaps you aren't familiar with the notion of brand equity. The most valuable brands are measured by people's emotional affinity for them, which translates into money. Take a look at the most valuable brands and tell me how many product vs. service companies exist on the list.

You mean ppl feel great when they talk abt MS? Brank equity is relevant in the env in which company operate. Every major company had there share of failure. Brand equity has done zilch if product does not stand on its own.

You are so far from the mark in not getting the point that I tire of responding...

YouTube is a product delivered online. You are confusing SaaS - which is simply a different way of delivering a PRODUCT - with implementation services that require human resources to scale.

Bing was on a $400M revenue trajectory as of July last year and that would translate into a $4-5B market cap were it a standalone company. For Microsoft that's small, but to dismiss it would be foolish.

Mope I am not comparing Bing to MS. I compare it to with Google with financial muscle of MS to back it. Its not going anywhere but right next to Zune.

And I think it's highly disingenuous to quote examples of products that haven't done well in your book. What the heck is that supposed to prove?

Not done well? They were great prod, Netscape was even pioneer, who were outclassed not due to feature or tech, but by marketing and financial muscle of there adveresery. Seems like you don't want to understand the point.

The fundamental differences between low margin body shop services that require more people to scale, and high margin product companies that can scale almost independent of human resources are glaring and obvious. I am sorry if you can't fathom them.

And how you get the product. By Magic or what? The resource required for hit product is financial and for outsourcing is human. With product, if you get it right you will earn big bucks if not you will be history.

I understand that you don't get it... I think there's no point you and me discussing this further. If you can't understand that a single product company - take Google, Microsoft, Cisco, HP etc. - has a market cap 5-10 times India's IT industry size, and if you can't understand that product margins are far higher than service margins (Yes, "sire" it is about money - and the bottom line is profitability/margins), or that product companies form the core of the IT industry around which service companies develop their practices, then I can't do anything for you. You are welcome to your views.

Seems for you innovation means having a product. Well for me Innovation means "a new way of doing something or new stuff that is made useful (Courtesy Wikipedia)"

Well I-Know-All sir...field is all yours.

 

[karan.1970]

the biggest IT enabled innovation that ever came out of India (mostly) was the whole BPO based offshoring.. Isnt it ?? Now not a product but nothing if not an innovation. And as I said earlier, this is the area where India is already a market leader and is gallopping up the value chain. And this is where most of the innovations are coming out . Not purely product innovations but more of a product& service bundle. Now it does not have a scalability model that is free of human capital (due to service bundle), but does change the paradigm of profitability. A claims underwriter (fully loaded cost approx $ 20K) who was earlier generating an EBIT of 20-25%, with the support from strong analytical models (developed inhouse) and outcome based pricing, starts to generate EBIT in excess of 400%. Not a product, but a process and financial innovation that has a huge business impact.. And isn't that really the key difference between Inventions and Innovations??

 

[sensenreason]

Sir,

Following is submitted for your kind information:

1. Indians are the biggest ethnic group in USA with most number of start ups.

2. They are successful and also richest immigrant group.
3. But, in India problem is of VC.
4. The example of garage start ups like Google and HP are possible in USA, because they have got culture of VC and the funding is very easy.
5. Yes, most of the companies you have mentioned has started from garage and by fresh students.They are not started by big or small any companies but by students.

6. And your answer lies in the same, in USA they got easy fund so the fresh ideas evolve, in India there is no easy flow of funds and you can see the results.
7. If u want a example from USA i can give u of Sabeer Bhatia a Indian who have founded Hotmail and later sold it to Microsoft.

thanks

Im sorry but I think you've missed the 'larger' point about Indian IT not making it beyond the service oriented businesses.

I can apart from myriad of other reasons highlight two key one's...

There is very little 'risk' taking ability in India.The concept of 'test & learn' is confined to business models rather than product or customer value.In other words, if you took an idea to your boss his first question is 'has it worked elsewhere'....same goes for funding...

The reason for the above is the extremely competitive nature of Indian business for what is still a small consumer market.So funds chase the highest bang for the buck at the minimal risk.

The other aspect is of leadership and skills.I dont doubt the ability of Indians to be innovative as demonstrated in research centers in India and Indians in other countries. Leadership in terms of product innovation is required to enable delivery of the product...it requires project management skills incl people management skills that are not very easily available..

Ive worked for American MNCs and Indian family run businesses and work in a mix of both now and speak from experience. Most Indians I speak to take offence at my conclusions...

I cannot compare Pakistan as Ive worked very briefly with one on one project...it didnt do too well; but given Pakistans smaller size in terms of Industry it should be more efficient but a bit player.

 

[desiman]

Im sorry but I think you've missed the 'larger' point about Indian IT not making it beyond the service oriented businesses.

I can apart from myriad of other reasons highlight two key one's...

There is very little 'risk' taking ability in India.The concept of 'test & learn' is confined to business models rather than product or customer value.In other words, if you took an idea to your boss his first question is 'has it worked elsewhere'....same goes for funding...

The reason for the above is the extremely competitive nature of Indian business for what is still a small consumer market.So funds chase the highest bang for the buck at the minimal risk.

The other aspect is of leadership and skills.I dont doubt the ability of Indians to be innovative as demonstrated in research centers in India and Indians in other countries. Leadership in terms of product innovation is required to enable delivery of the product...it requires project management skills incl people management skills that are not very easily available..

Ive worked for American MNCs and Indian family run businesses and work in a mix of both now and speak from experience. Most Indians I speak to take offence at my conclusions...

I cannot compare Pakistan as Ive worked very briefly with one on one project...it didnt do too well; but given Pakistans smaller size in terms of Industry it should be more efficient but a bit player.

I totally disagree with you on all aspects, please read my previous post before commenting on the Indian IT industry.

 

[Awesome]

Can you guys decide what the context of this thread....CS or Product?

Errr okay, but we can all have our own opinions, why the aggressive remark dude? We're just chitchatting and sharing experiences. No zabardasti to accept anybody's opinion here.

 

[sensenreason]

I totally disagree with you on all aspects, please read my previous post before commenting on the Indian IT industry.

I replied to your post. Its okay to disagree but please enlighten me what do you disagree with?

 

[humblehobbes]

from my experience, most of the software companies including TCS, Infosys and Wipro are involved in low level code manipulations. only very few are involved in extensive coding and even they are not involved in the HLD(high level design) where the expertize and innovations are required. Most of the job that is being done in these "IT companies" can be done with the help of people who dont have a college degree. That is to say, that the only advantage is the cost factor for the western companies and the economic fillip for the home country. other than that, the total intellectual work or stimulation which these companies offer is quite negligible.

In my opinion, it has made snobs out of simple folks and has wasted an entire generation of Engineers on something that totally doesnt require the kind of expertise which a properly qualified engineer could offer.

 

[Peregrine]

Hi,
what is the status of IT parks and media cities in Pakistan?

 

[HariSeldon]

Im sorry but I think you've missed the 'larger' point about Indian IT not making it beyond the service oriented businesses.

I can apart from myriad of other reasons highlight two key one's...

There is very little 'risk' taking ability in India.The concept of 'test & learn' is confined to business models rather than product or customer value.In other words, if you took an idea to your boss his first question is 'has it worked elsewhere'....same goes for funding...

The reason for the above is the extremely competitive nature of Indian business for what is still a small consumer market.So funds chase the highest bang for the buck at the minimal risk.

The other aspect is of leadership and skills.I dont doubt the ability of Indians to be innovative as demonstrated in research centers in India and Indians in other countries. Leadership in terms of product innovation is required to enable delivery of the product...it requires project management skills incl people management skills that are not very easily available..

Ive worked for American MNCs and Indian family run businesses and work in a mix of both now and speak from experience. Most Indians I speak to take offence at my conclusions...

I cannot compare Pakistan as Ive worked very briefly with one on one project...it didnt do too well; but given Pakistans smaller size in terms of Industry it should be more efficient but a bit player.

Looks like you are talking about innovation in India rather than Innovation in India IT companies.
In that context I have to disagree with you. Take a good hard look at India Auto sector. Bajaj, TVS, Tata & Mahindra are succesfully fighting the global auto giants in there segments. THey have taken risk, they have innovated. Pharma is another sector albit not that sucessful. Indian telecom is another example. They innovated to bring the cost down to make Rs10 recharge feasible.

For Indian IT comp, I will say how old are they. This sector really started after Y2k. Its hardly 10 yrs old. In due time you will see the result. Right now they have just scratched the surface. Opportunity is huge. Outsourcing market is huge. They have expertise. Why waste it?

 

[HariSeldon]

Errr okay, but we can all have our own opinions, why the aggressive remark dude? We're just chitchatting and sharing experiences. No zabardasti to accept anybody's opinion here.

hmm...it was not aggressive...just tounge-in-cheek as TL said that this thread is abt Product and not CS to my earlier post.

 

[sensenreason]

Looks like you are talking about innovation in India rather than Innovation in India IT companies.
In that context I have to disagree with you. Take a good hard look at India Auto sector. Bajaj, TVS, Tata & Mahindra are succesfully fighting the global auto giants in there segments. THey have taken risk, they have innovated. Pharma is another sector albit not that sucessful. Indian telecom is another example. They innovated to bring the cost down to make Rs10 recharge feasible.

For Indian IT comp, I will say how old are they. This sector really started after Y2k. Its hardly 10 yrs old. In due time you will see the result. Right now they have just scratched the surface. Opportunity is huge. Outsourcing market is huge. They have expertise. Why waste it?

Yes, you have a point. Ive made certain points that have a Non IT context as well. However, thats even more reason to worry as IT is after all a small part of India Inc. Ive generalised a little bit but if you were doing country comparisons one has to generalise.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

Intel, Microsoft, java all were made by American and tell me if India made something that can compete with any of them?

Though these platforms were developed in US but it was Indian IT brain which derived these platforms for further enhancements. The Indian contributions in the development and enhancement of these technologies cannot be ignored . Infact some of the Indian authors have written globaly renowned text books on these technologies. Many Indian profetionals have contributed to the Java open source software developement(The movement originated from MIT) and web desighning tools like the struts framework and alot more ..!