...
首页> 外文期刊>Industry and innovation >Sponsors, communities, and standards: ethernet vs. token ring in the local area networking business
【24h】

Sponsors, communities, and standards: ethernet vs. token ring in the local area networking business

机译:赞助者,社区和标准:局域网网络业务中的以太网与令牌环

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Network-based industries cannot exist without standards. For firms competing in such industries the outcome of standards contests can determine success or failure. Entire industries can emerge to exploit a standard, e.g. the Internet. In standards contests business strategy can be of critical importance (Cusumano et al. 1992). This paper draws upon the work by von Burg (2001) to explain the outcome of the local area networking (LAN) adoption contest that began in the early 1980s and essentially ended in the early 1990s with the de facto ubiquity of the Ethernet standard. Upon initial examination, traditional economic explanations, emphasizing increasing returns and strategic decisions made by individual firms or actors as critical in the process, would appear sufficient to predict the ultimate success of Ethernet. We challenge this explanation and argue that it is insufficient. Equally important to Ethernet's success was the ability of its sponsors to create a vibrant community of firms, which continually lowered prices and upgraded the technology. Standard setting in the LAN industry is particularly interesting for four reasons. The first reason is that there was no government involvement in the process, the process occurred entirely in the private sector. The second reason is that there were a number of proprietary standards and two standards were even approved by the same standards-setting body, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). In other words, there were two de jure standards, of which one, Ethernet, would become the de facto standard. The third reason is that the standards had to evolve technologically to handle the increasing amount of data that customers wanted to communicate. This meant that those adhering to the standard had to agree on changing the standard. The fourth reason is that this process is a case study in the results of a situation in which a dominant vendor, IBM, backs an open standard against a community of smaller vendors backing an open standard. In this case the standard backed by the smaller vendors emerged victorious.
机译:没有标准就不可能存在基于网络的行业。对于在此类行业中竞争的公司,标准竞赛的结果可以决定成败。整个行业都可以采用标准,例如互联网。在标准竞赛中,业务战略可能至关重要(Cusumano等,1992)。本文利用von Burg(2001)的工作来解释局域网采用竞赛的结果,该竞赛始于1980年代初,而实际上由于以太网标准的普遍存在而在1990年代初结束。经过初步审查,传统的经济解释强调了单个公司或参与者在此过程中至关重要的不断增长的回报和战略决策,似乎足以预测以太网的最终成功。我们对此解释提出质疑,并认为它是不够的。以太网的成功者同样重要的是其赞助商建立充满活力的公司社区的能力,这些社区不断降低价格并升级技术。局域网行业的标准设置特别有趣,原因有四个。第一个原因是该过程没有政府参与,该过程完全发生在私营部门。第二个原因是,存在许多专有标准,甚至有两个标准已由同一标准制定机构电气和电子工程师协会(IEEE)批准。换句话说,存在两个法律上的标准,其中一个以太网将成为事实上的标准。第三个原因是,标准必须在技术上进行发展,以处理客户想要交流的日益增长的数据量。这意味着那些遵守标准的人必须同意更改标准。第四个原因是,此过程是案例研究的结果,在这种情况下,占主导地位的供应商IBM支持开放标准,而较小的供应商群体则支持开放标准。在这种情况下,较小的供应商支持的标准取得了胜利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号