What is the Relevance of Technology

"Technology in the long-run is irrelevant". That is what a client of my own told me when I created demonstration to him about a new service. I had been talking about the item's pros and cons and listed "state-of-the-art technology" or something to that effect, as one of them. That is when he created his declaration. I noticed later that he was correct, at least within the perspective of how I used "Technology" in my demonstration. But I began thinking about whether he could be right in other situations as well.

What is Technology?

Merriam-Webster describes it as:
1
a: the program expertise especially in a particular area: technological innovation 2 <medical technology>
b: a capability given by the program expertise <a car's fuel-saving technology>
2
: a manner of achieving a task especially using technical procedures, techniques, or knowledge
3
: the specific aspects of a particular field of effort <educational technology>
Wikipedia describes it as:
Technology (from Ancient τέχνη, techne, "art, skill, clever of hand"; and -λογία, -logia[1]) is the making, adjustment, utilization, and data of resources, machines, techniques, designs, techniques, and types of organization, to be able to resolve a issue, improve a pre-existing solution to a issue, achieve a goal, handle an used input/output regards or perform a particular function. It can also refer to the collection of such resources, such as equipment, variations, preparations and procedures. Technological advancement significantly affect human as well as other animal species' ability to control and adjust to their natural surroundings. The phrase can either provide generally or to particular areas: these include construction technological advancement, healthcare technological advancement, and technological advancement.
Both explanations focus around the same thing - program and utilization.
Technology is an enabler

Many individuals incorrectly believe it is technological advancement which pushes advancement. Yet from the explanations above, that is clearly not the case. It is chance which describes advancement and technological advancement which allows advancement. Think of the traditional "Build a better mousetrap" example taught in most business educational institutions. You might have the technological advancement to develop a better mousetrap, but if you have no rats or the old mousetrap performs well, there is no chance and then the technological advancement to develop a better one becomes unrelated. However, if you are flooded with rats then the chance prevails to innovate a item using your technological advancement.
Another example, one with which I am very well familiar, are technology start-up organizations. I've been associated with both those that been successful and those that unsuccessful. Each owned and operated unique innovative technologies. The main distinction was chance. Those that unsuccessful could not find the chance to develop an important advancement using their technological advancement. Actually to thrive, these organizations had to transform frequently into something totally different and if they were fortunate they could make use of types of their unique technological advancement. More often than not, the very first technological advancement ended up in the discarded pile. Technology, thus, is an enabler whose ultimate value undertaking is to fix our lives. In purchase to be appropriate, it needs to be used to make enhancements that are motivated by chance.
Technology as an aggressive advantage?
Many organizations list a technological advancement as one of their aggressive advantages. Is this valid? In some instances yes, but In many instances no.
Technology produces along two routes - an transformative direction and an excellent direction.
A innovative technology is one which allows new sectors or allows solutions to conditions were previously not possible. Semiconductor technology is an example. Not only did it create new sectors as well as, but it produced other innovative technologies - transistor technological advancement, incorporated routine technological advancement, micro-processor technological advancement. All which provide many of merchandise and solutions we consume nowadays. But is semiconductor technological advancement an aggressive advantage? Looking at the number of semiconductor businesses that exist nowadays (with new ones developing every day), I'd say not. How about micro-processor technology? Again, no. Lots of micro-processor organizations out there. How about quad primary micro-processor technology? Not as a lot of organizations, but you have Apple, AMD, ARM, and a host of organizations building custom quad primary processor chips (Apple, New samsung, Qualcomm, etc). So again, not much of an aggressive benefits. Competition from competitive technologies and quick accessibility to IP mitigates the recognized aggressive benefits of any particular technological advancement. Android working system vs iOS is an example of approach. Both operating-system are types of UNIX. Apple company used their technological advancement to present iOS and obtained an early industry benefits. However, Search engines, utilizing their version of Unix (a competitive technology), caught up relatively easily. The factors behind this lie not in the actual technological advancement, but in how items created possible by those technologies were brought to promote (free vs. walled garden, etc.) and the variations in the ideal thoughts of each organization.
Evolutionary technology is one which gradually produces upon the base innovative technological advancement. But by it's very nature, the step-by-step change is easier for a opponent to match or leapfrog. Take for example wireless mobile phone technological advancement. Company V presented 4G items prior to Company A and while it may have had a temporary benefits, as soon as Company A presented their 4G items, the benefits due to technological advancement vanished. The client went back to choosing Company A or Company V centered on cost, service, coverage, whatever, but not centered on technological advancement. Thus technological advancement might have been appropriate in the temporary, but in the lengthy run, became unrelated.
In modern world, technologies tend to easily become commoditized, and within any particular technological advancement can be found the plant seeds of its own death.
Technology's Relevance
This article was written from the prospective of an end client. From a developer/designer viewpoint factors get murkier. The further one is taken away from the technological advancement, the less appropriate it becomes. To a designer, the technological advancement can look like a item. An allowing item, but a item however, and thus it is highly appropriate. Bose uses a exclusive indication handling technological advancement to enable items that meet a set of industry requirements and thus the technological advancement and what it allows is appropriate to them. Their customers are more concerned with how it sounds, what's the cost, what's the quality, etc., and not so much with how it is obtained, thus the technological advancement used is much less appropriate to them.
Recently, I was involved in a conversation on Google+ about the new Samsung X mobile phone. Lots of individuals on those content criticized the device for a lot of factors - cost, closed start loading machine, etc. There were also plenty of scrapes on the truth that it didn't have a quad-core processer like the S4 or HTC One which were priced in the same way. What they did not understand is that whether the maker used 1, 2, 4, or 8 cores in the end does not matter as lengthy as the device can deliver an aggressive (or even best of class) function set, performance, cost, and consumer experience. The iPhone is one of the most successful phones ever produced, and yet it runs on a dual-core processer. It still provides one of the best customer encounters on the industry. The options that are allowed by the technological advancement are what are appropriate to the client, not the technological advancement itself.
The importance of technological advancement therefore, is as an enabler, not as a item function or an aggressive benefits, or any variety of other factors - an enabler. Looking at the Android working system working system, it is an impressive software technological advancement, and yet Search engines gives it away. Why? Because separate, it does nothing for Search engines. Giving it away allows other manufacturers to use their expertise to develop items and solutions which then act as enablers for Search engines items and solutions. To Search engines, that's where the actual value is.
The ownership of or accessibility to a technology is only important for what it allows you to do - make enhancements which fix issues. That is the actual importance of technological advancement.