Nintendos Disruption Strategy and all the rest are falling into the trap!

[Demotruk]

theprof00 said:
Live! disrupted the traditional single player experience with laggy online and crummy games (original xbox)

And BR is disrupting the DVD industry from the top-down by providing much higher end quality for a similar price. (BR players are nearing sub 100$, and the ps3 is what secured this "disruption?")
Also, the PSPGo thing with DD seems to be doing this. Smaller screen, limited capacity, niche consumer base.

In this article I'm reading, The Ipod disrupted mp3 from the top down, but satellite from the bottom up later on in the lifetime.

Also, I'm curious what happens when a disruptor faces "controlled environment". For example, it's hard to break into BR's market because it has contracts with all the major studios.

All of those require extending the definition of disruption, they are not the strategy we are talking about.

 

Live! didn't disrupt anything, it may have had flaws but it wasn't aiming at low-end underserved customers. It simply provided a different service to single player games, and improved over time. If it was really disrupting it would have massive growth while the incumbent (single player and local multiplayer starts to stagnate and eventually decline). Over that period the Wii is what has had massive growth, Live! has grown but notso much compared to the industry as a whole. It simply doesn't fit.

Blu-ray is way beyond disruption. Disruption is never 'a better product'. Blu-ray is sustained innovation, it's the normal progression for formats to be replaced by better ones, not disruption. Niche is not disruption either.

Don't worry, it's not unusual to misunderstand disruption. Most people go away with a superficial idea of it, and think that they are being disruptive by making a 'better product', or something for a niche group. But it can be rectified by reading more about it.