Re: [RRG] What does incremental deployment mean - 2 questions

[Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>]

Hi Philip,

I think your question is a valuable one:

> What's the minimum deployment where the benefit for the party deploying
> is greater than the party's cost/pain?

The answer is quantitative, so it doesn't work as a definition of
"incrementally deployable" on its own, unless you define some
threshold to turn the quantity into a "Yes" or a "No".

I would say that if the answer to your question is zero - no-one
else has deployed it - *and* the benefit was not just positive, but
initially substantial and generally unrelated to how many other
people deploy it - then the system would be "incrementally
deployable" by my definition.

I look forward to Tony's response and to other people writing about
their understanding of "incrementally deployable".

I realise that my interpretation of these two words is actually
quite complex - while I wrongly assumed everyone else understood it
the same way I did.

Still, I think my definition:

   (9)  Is the technology fully or widely deployable in a purely
        incremental fashion?

   For this to be true, the answer to

   (6)  Do the benefits to each early adoptor depend on the
        proportion of other users who have adopted it?

   would have to be "no" (or perhaps "not to a strong degree").

is a much more stringent and useful for the RRG than the definition
which I think Tony used.


  - Robin


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg