tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7611915.post6770733337588353483..comments2008-11-24T07:34:26.232-08:00Jim Fioratohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04111942317657114808noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7611915.post-228494298446772912008-11-24T07:34:00.000-08:002008-11-24T07:34:00.000-08:00I agree that there's an equal place for the Apples and the SAPs of the world. But, which one would you speculate is leaner? Apple or SAP?<BR/><BR/>And I don't think you can dismiss the "who would you rather work for?" point. That's the most important piece of it all (from my perspective, at least).Jim Fioratohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04111942317657114808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7611915.post-16097753986459513232008-11-24T07:20:00.000-08:002008-11-24T07:20:00.000-08:00I think there is a lot of truth to this and a better balance is required. <BR/><BR/>That said, I hear the "fewer great features is better than lots of moderate features". I do not think this is quite as obvious as it sounds to many people. I think is strongly depends on your target audience<BR/><BR/>If you are selling a product to a business that needs to do A,B,C,D and E and you come in and say "I can do A and B, really well!" and your competitor walks in and says, "I can do them all, well enough", you are likely to lose the business. <BR/><BR/>Now, your competitor better REALLY be able to do them all well enough, or they will lose customers and market reputation. Assuming they can, though, you will be fighting for years to compete.<BR/><BR/>The simple example is SAP and Apple. They are very different companies and both are very large. On makes "all of the features, well enough" and the other concentrates on "the right features." Is one wrong and one right? I don't think so, just different markets.<BR/><BR/>It may be that you would rather work at Apple than SAP, but that should be seperated from right and wrong in their approaches.Willnoreply@blogger.com