Thanks to Waldis Crebs for this simple way to understand competition between Apple, Google and Microsoft.-------------------What we can see here is the relationship that Google, Microsoft and Apple has with the market. The central intersection is the common access option. This divides the market as a tribe, or as a technology lovers, or barriers produced for a typical look and feel. Some of them are common as couple, like Search and IP Telephony for Microsoft and Google. The exclusive way that each one uses as a differentiation is really related to Google, Microsoft and Apple address the market. Google is the only one with the concept of "long tail", Microsoft and Apple are clearly focused on 20% of the power curve.Makes sense this bi-polarity phenomena, if you think that Microsoft and Apple are the grand fathers. They comes from the 80s. If we see Microsoft going absorb Nokia terminals (Only an speculation pls!), also makes sense cas the main strategy from 80s and 90s is the following strategy. Perhaps Microsoft believe that to compete, they should compete with the same Apple set of tools in this arena. Their structural equivalence (Apple and Microsoft) produces a sense of alter-ego. Apple is the perceived alter that Microsoft ego wants to reproduce.Is it possible?!?!?!?I don't know. Let's wait and see. Marta Matui: Midias Sociais E A Era De Aquario: "Perdao pelos enormes erros que cometerei nesse post. Falarei de memoria e esse nao e o meu forte. A muitos anos atras, uns 7 anos, tive que..." The Knowledge Effect | UPDATE: Mobile Patent Suits - Graphic of the Day:'via Blog this'When I see, even late, this kind of reaction I think the e-world is really highly institucionalized. There is no technology standardization, at least born to be "unregulated", however the the regulation is coming in. The new walled garden will become boring sooner or later. The battle of devices has now become a war of ecosystems. In this case it is where ecosystems include not only the hardware and software of the device, but developers, applications, ecommerce, advertising, search, social applications, location-based services, unified communications and many other things. Our competitors arent taking our market share with devices; they are taking our market share with an entire ecosystem. This means were going to have to decide how we either build, catalyse or join an ecosystemActually, by ecosystem, I understand it as behavior focus on collaboration in different dimensions like consumer-2-consumer, provider-2-consumer, consumer-2-provider and provider-2-provider. All of them are embedded in a socially structured field where the provider should compete not only for technology adoption, but also for the collaboration of consumers and other providers. Technical relationship, as per design or pure technology should be added to political relationship. The legitimation of one in this arena is more related with a public political action. The discourse (assuming this is real) lies on pure technical point of view, all the examples are directly or indirectly related to social network solutions. Eventually directed to the Nokia's technical community. Rephrasing it, this should sound like "Hej guys, we are