How to describe systems

Powers of Limited Systems : Shakespeare vs James Joyce

Shakespeare didn't invent a new language, James Joyce did.

Shakespeare got rich in his life time , James Joyce didn't.

Shakespeare got fame in his life time , James Joyce didn't.

Shakespeare was happy in his life time , James Joyce wasn't.

Now you see working too hard is not that good.

Power of Limited Systems : World Cup 2014 Germany 7 Brazil 1

World Cup 2014's semi-final  ended with Germany beating Brazil 7 : 1. Germany won in spite of and because of its limited systems. Limited systems are that powerful and devastating.

Main Reasons for Brazil's Loss

1. Brazil coach's big picture does not seem to include "flanks" and "midfield." 
2. Germany's limited systems are powerful and devastating.
3. Brazil failed to come up with better or newer systems e.g. Germany already know how to cope "total football," "tiki taka," etc. Brazil should at least borrow from Stephen Chow and his Shaolin Soccer Have you noticed that Muay Thai's kicks are useful in getting the balls back in crowded situations? 

Limited Systems

 They are limited because

1. they apply to only certain specific situations.
2. they lack creativity, inspiration, flair, sparks.
3. they can miss certain opportunities.
4. they can break down totally in certain scenarios.

 Still they are extremely powerful because

1. they are simple to carry and execute
2. they are simple to change for certain opportunities and system breakdowns.
3. Even when you have to discard them all, they are too simple to cost you a lot.  

Digital Product Innovation,Academia,Grounded Innovation

Many people agree that Gorbachev as a professor can be cool but Gorbachev as a politician is disastrous.

Suppose I am a political science prof. I can invent a voting system such that

1. age 5-10        1/2 vote per person
2. age 11-20      1 vote per person
3. age 21-30      2 vote per person
4. age 31-40      3 vote per person
5. age 41-50      4 vote per person
6. age 51-above 1/2 vote per person

Yes, it's silly and impractical. But it will work in any classroom and in any academic journal. At least, it's "controversial," "radical," "innovative," "thought-provoking" etc.

Now, here comes a book on digital product innovation, Grounded Innovation Strategies for Creating Digital Products and the companion blog.

On Page 10, there are five properties that will be useful to explain digital products:

1. Information Processing: computation e.g very early mainframes
2. Interaction e.g. sketchpad, word processor
3. Networking e.g. Internet PC/laptop
4. Sensing e.g. Adidas, Nike
5. Proactivity : Machine deciding for itself e.g. Smart phone

First of all are these properties to distinguish digital products from non-digital ones, or to distinguish one digital product from other digital products?

e.g. My pencil doesn't have "Information Processing" capacity, but my PC does. But my door knobs and door buttons do interact with us.

Then, if all digital products have " Information Processing" power, why include it in the list?

Then, "Proactivity"? A Tumbling Kelly toy always returns to its original position. Is it deciding this for itself? Doesn't any PC/laptop, smart phone, digital product decide for themselves to a degree?

We can keep on asking. But that's enough. We are not doing an academic exercise here.

We will discuss later another book on digital products, Inventing The Medium. An MIT book, but no better.