In the early days of computing, the norm was to think about computer-based solutions in terms of hardware, software and peopleware. Although we have evolved to using terms like "IT", "infrastructure", "architecture" and "cloud", it cannot be denied that the basics stay. Think about it: as primitive as it may seem, all else fails, the morse code rules; all else fails, the typewriter is your friend; and all else fails, a hand fan works just the same. If you go back to its roots, regardless of its size and shape, the computer was, is and will always be about the hardware, the software and the peopleware.
Over the years, computing industries developed vertically with companies focusing on hardware only, software only and peopleware only products and services. Although vertical focus would remain to be practiced for decades to come, it seems to have reached its peak. Over the past 10 years, companies are bravely venturing back to delivering "computers" in full form complete with the hardware itself, the software to run in it and the peopleware to support them. It is no longer about making devices available. It is no longer about making application programs available. It is no longer about people making the overall product actually useful.
The hardware is nothing without its software, and vise versa, but both are nothing without the users and the people behind them. All three should be in place and should work together in harmony. Each one contributes to the success of the other. The progress of one progresses the other. They should all grow and mature at the same time. None of them should be able to overwhelm or, even, underwhelm the other. They should compliment each other. Suffice to say, the interdependency is inevitable.
A computer-based solution should be ready for immediate use and to deliver its value in the present time. It can neither be ahead nor behind of its time. What is a device capable of if it can’t run the applications developed to run in it? What is an application for if there is no device available that’s capable of running it? What’s the purpose of both if there is no one who’d actually find the value to use them or to even invest on them? After all, failed expectations are opportunities lost.
This is the context of synchronized innovation where, all things in balance, nothing should ever go to waste…