Tesla, Edison, the electric chair, and new technology
Posted by Rick Ellis on March 27, 2008
Nikola Tesla, my favorite of the great inventors, who was arguably the most inventive genius of the last century, invented the first successful way to create alternating current. To this day, whenever we plug anything into an outlet, we’re using his AC Motor design. Along the way he also invented the xray, the radio, the first wireless remote control, and about two hundred other things.
Before AC there was only direct current, which is the principle that batteries operate on. The use of DC became widespread in the United States around the turn of the last century thanks to a guy named Thomas Edison, who you might have heard of. Edison invented lots of nifty things too, and among other things, owned lots of power plants all over the east coast.
DC, however, is a terrible form of energy to transmit over long distances since wire tends to act like a resistor, gobbling up the energy. Houses closest to the power plants had bright light bulbs; the ones farther away had proportionally dimmer ones.
Despite the shortcomings of DC, Edison had a vested interest in its continued use since he was making a fortune from it. Then along came Tesla with his superior AC, threatening to put Edison out of business.
Not one to go down without a fight, Edison tried to convince the public that Tesla’s design was very dangerous by electrocuting small animals to death using AC current. He then built an electric chair and used his political influence to get Auburn Prison to execute prisoners with it. Eventually lots of other prisons installed his chair as well. Nice fellow, that Tom.
A common expression at the time when someone was executed using Edison’s electric chair was to say “he got Westinghoused”, a reference to George Westinghouse who had backed Nikola Tesla financially while developing AC.
Despite Edison’s attempts at FUD, AC eventually won the battle, and today, no one would dream of using DC current. It took many years, however, for people fully embrace AC.
I’m reminded of this story when I think about the stages that people go through when adopting a new technology, or simply a new product. Just because you offer something better or different does not mean people will buy it. Often, they have too much invested in whatever they currently use.
Windows users migrating to Apple is a classic example. For some, no matter how much they might want to become an Apple user, having to replace all of their applications and much of their hardware is too high a price. The change has nothing to do with a desire to use better tools, it’s a function of the practicality of such a move.
There are basically four stages that consumers go through when moving from one technology or product to another: 1. unaware of the product, 2. aware of the product, 3. desiring the product, and 4. adopting the product.
Each of those steps is exponentially, not incrementally, more challenging. Getting consumer awareness is relatively easy. All it takes is an investment in advertising. Getting people to desire your product is much more difficult. It means you have to create something more compelling then what they currently use. Adoption is harder yet, particularly if it involves a drastic change, or a significant time or financial expenditure. The upside must be so great that it overcomes all of the negatives.
That’s why it’s almost always better to be first to market than best. You can still eventually win if you’re late to the game, just like Tesla did, but it takes much more work, and your product must be that much more great.

These concentrics also inform the unique opportunity of “firsts” to lock-in adopters, or to at least define the outer level at which they permit third parties to operate. At first—because the thing didn’t even exist before—third parties are cool with that.
What’s interesting to me is how that breaks down over time, especially if the originator’s service becomes a cultural expectation. Or, rather, the *arc* of how a platform shifts from proprietary to public—and how that arc can be managed, if you’ve got enough foresight—is the thing I’m lately trying to grok.
Or maybe it’s simple. Maybe IP can’t be justly capitalized, and the only thing to sell is service, burnished by reputation, and more innovation.
LQ
Posted by Lou Quillio from Troy, NY USA on Thursday, March 27, 2008