I was listening to a talk show while I was out doing some yard work, and I heard the host making the argument that sub-standard products often win, based on marketing efforts. His examples were the ones we've all heard: Beta vs. VHS, DOS vs. Mac (et. al.), LCD vs. Plasma. I could add Smalltalk vs. C++ or Java, too. The problem is, you have to really consider the term "best", and how the buyers of the product rank things:

• Beta vs. VHS: early on, VHS had double the recording capability. That mattered a lot if you wanted to, say, turn on the VCR at 8, go out, and be sure that you captured the entire schedule on your favorite channel
• DOS vs. everything else: Price was the killer. When I bought my first PC, I really wanted a Mac - but I couldn't afford the markup (over $2K difference at the time). The market chose price over functionality. As time went on, the sheer size of the DOS/Windows world made for more functionality, too.
• LCD vs. Plasma: You can argue about better picture all you want, but presentation matters - and in the store, the brighter LCD screen counts as "better".

What about Smalltalk? Well, I started teaching Smalltalk classes back in 1992. You have to keep something basic in mind: the base image back then consumed 6 MB of RAM. On today's systems that ship with 2-4 GB, the slightly larger 9 MB is trivial, but back then, 1-2 MB was common, and 8 MB was a loaded system. On a loaded system, running the Windows version of Smalltalk took over the machine. Sure, you were vastly more productive than C++, but could you deploy your application - would it run on the typical end user system of the day?

Things have changed for Smalltalk, fortunately. Today, there are vast reams of memory available on desktops, and Smalltalk is, well, small compared to the typical Java system. The old problems Smalltalk had are long gone, and now it's mostly a matter of getting past the old perceptions. Based on Cincom's profitability in Smalltalk, I'd say we are doing well there.

My main point is this: before you make the claim that the "better product lost", look at the winning product with the eyes of the people who bought the other one. It's probably the case that they're ranking something the second product does better much, much more highly than you expected.

Technorati Tags: sales