I can’t stop thinking about google Wave, and what a compelling innovation case study it is.

I think Wave is a game-changer. Wave fundamentally redefines online communication (email and instant messaging) and document collaboration.

And, it was created by five people working together in a conference room.

By contrast, Microsoft Labs, the innovation lab for Microsoft has had more than 500 employees (there were recent cut backs).  The only memorable product they created was Photosynth, which is cool, but is not a competitive game-changer.

And, Microsoft Bing will be launched with a $100 million advertising campaign.  It looks like a good search engine, but it plays today’s game, and doesn’t invent the future.

I heard someone say that advertising is the price companies pay for unremarkable products.  Have you ever seen Google advertise any product on primetime television?

I guess the Apple ads are an exception, because Apple products are remarkable.  However, they need to compete with Microsoft and its huge advertising budget, so maybe the combination of advertising and a great product can provide a one-two punch, but a huge advertising budget can not in itself generate a sustainable competitive advantage.

Previous related posts:

plea to Microsoft.

The History of Microsoft.

My idea for an apple ad.

very clever – link here.

the mission of the Institute is to enable the building of ocean communities, to experiment with innovative political and social systems…

they just had a contest, to envision what life offshore would be like.

These cities would be great for my refugee idea…

For more details, click here for source (fast company).

this is strangely alluring…

I’ve seen the biodegradable corn-based plastic alternative cups, which have the same strength characteristics as plastic but fully biodegrade within a couple months.

You can also get food containers etc. – check out the source here.

The amount of waste we generate is unbelievable – particularly packaging waste from food products – how long will it take to stop using petroleum-based plastic packaging?

Corn should be used for food – one might say?

Build urban farms!  Check out these plans by the Hantz Group to revitalize Detroit by building huge urban farms on abandoned and vacant property.

And this concept for NYC.

[previous sharkride post on urban farming from September, 2007 here.]

I love concept videos!  This is cool!

• Envirobank’s Reverse Vending Machine – simplifying recycling

May 4, 2009

Myth # 1: The United States car industry is failing, because Americans are demanding small cars and not buying big cars.

Look at the sales data for April 2009:

609,024 SUV’s and Pickups sold

vs.

149,822 small cars sold

That’s a factor of 4x more SUV’s and pickups sold than small cars.

(by the way, the Toyota Prius, which is often used as the gold standard example for what American car companies are missing… isn’t even among the top 20 vehicles sold in the United States.)

Myth # 2:  Fiat has “small engine technology,” according to Obama, that Chrysler does not have, and needs in order to turn things around. (and, therefore, this justifies just giving away an American car company to a foreign company.)

In reality, Chrysler already has hybrid technology, and also has the capabilities to develop a compact car.

Chrysler is failing, because it is losing market share, and the company has no hits (and no hits in the pipeline).

The Chrysler brand does not have a single vehicle in the top 20 vehicles sold.

And, even in the SUV and pickup truck segments, the competition is killing them.

For example, The Chevy Silverado and Ford F series each outsell Dodge Ram by nearly a factor of 2x.

Chrysler lost the pulse of the American consumer, and focused on numbers (Cerberus is a hedge fund, after all), rather than on passion and design.

Fixing that focus will turn things around — not Fiat’s “small engine technology!”

Sales data source here (WSJ).

I really like this – it’s designed to mimic a tree! [from WSJ competition]