- مبلغ: ۸۶,۰۰۰ تومان
- مبلغ: ۹۱,۰۰۰ تومان
We conduct a case study of the battle for market dominance between the industry platforms led by Apple and by IBM in the early personal computer industry (1977–1986). Platform leaders such as Apple or IBM need to consider many technological, strategic, and network factors in managing their industry platforms. We explore how platform leaders deploy these factors and their interactions during a battle for market dominance. We find that platform leaders choose various control modes to do so, ranging from central control to distributed control. The adoption of these control modes is dependent on the choice of being first entrant with a technological discontinuity (central control) or follower (distributed control). Within a control mode, technological, strategic, and network factors are managed in a coherent way
5.1. Platform control modes From the case study, we see that platform leaders choose a control mode for managing their platform during a battle for market dominance. Apple created a platform in which the company itself integrated the hardware, operating system, user interface, and accompanying software to ensure a seamless customer experience. To safeguard the technical quality of the platform, Apple used a central control mode. In contrast, IBM defined the technological architecture, but chose for an open platform so that any supplier could provide components. IBM's platform initially lacked the technical quality that was attained by Apple, but it was more flexible than Apple's, allowing for easier innovation of modules. We conclude that Apple adopted a more centralized control mode, making all the important platform decisions itself, whereas IBM employed a more distributed control mode, allowing multiple partners to contribute to the platform.