I've read that Encarta represented the first shoe
to drop for EB; it
could not easily adapt to that technology shift. Now, with the benefit
of hindsight this does not seem as though it would have been such a big
change.
The major paradigm shift lay in the enabling of two-way online
communications. The passive consumer could now also become a content
producer. This wasn't quite what ISP's had hoped for in an asymmetrical
technology that assumed that the public would want to download far more
than they would upload. Their model also presumed that they would
profit from also providing the content.
I'm not sure this changes my point. If Britannica had adapted to the
proliferation of personal computing and portable media by releasing a
comprehensive, easy-to-use and widely advertised electronic edition
before Microsoft managed to release Encarta, they may have remained on
top into the 21st century. Similarly, if they had jumped on the Wiki
bandwagon a little later, they may have further adapted and remained
on top for several more decades.
One should not presume that any specific technology
will be the one that
leads to the big steps forward.
Again, this was not my point. We should not invest in few technologies
and hope they win out, we should spread our bets. We should adopt and
adapt to new technologies as soon as they appear. We shouldn't be
afraid to change; Britannica were and they are dead.
--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill(a)gmail.com)