Is it possible now to repeat the success of the IT giants?

Question

Startups

Is it possible to repeat the success of such companies as google, apple, etc. in modern realities?
With the current level of competition and the capabilities of IT giants, who, at the slightest desire, can crush / rot / redeem.
Please provide a more detailed answer if possible.

Answer 1

If you call the project a startup - perhaps, if just a project - no.

Answer 2

Here you can go from the questions "Do I have 5-10-15-20-25 years to invent %gangetname% %OSname% %searchname%?". In the 60-70-80s OSes and other fundamental corporation-forming things were written by companies of 5-7 people. And then, over the course of 10-15 years, tons of application applications, network-server applications, graphics, sound, etc. were written by a staff of 5000. Are you competent enough in modern fundamental trends to launch a project for 10 years? To repeat the success you must already be part of Google Apple. Part of the board of directors, so that you can see trends for 5-10 years. And so it's just a conversation of couch crows who managed to screw box2D to their clone of angry-birds.
Many of the answers are not entirely correct. The author means the creation of a corporation , notstartup-mobile-app .

Answer 3

Can. But not so easy. I recommend reading this article. It's not exactly the same, but the thoughts are correct to some extent.
Actually, you can. The fact is that you can always create a new market, because you can sell almost everything, even air, if it is applied correctly. Let's just take a look and see where the international IT giants are strong:
Apple is strong in their own ecosystem, everywhere outside of it they begin to lose ground instantly (Windows' iTunes is set in 99.9% of cases to synchronize iPads and iPhones). They make money on technology and software as a whole, they simply don’t know how to do anything else. And that limits them quite a bit.
Google earns almost nothing directly on software and hardware: all of their software is either free or open source; They do not have their own iron production. They earn 95% from advertising. On contextual advertising. Having bought their phone, it will send reports about how you use it and if you stop taking pictures, they will put a plus sign that you are interested in photos, but, apparently, you are not satisfied with the quality. I won't be surprised if they already have huge neurons working for the whole ... that decide what to show you. That is why Apple seems to be tearing up Google so much: they create people, unlike Google, who create for advertisers. That is why Apple's user-centric ecosystem is more popular than Google's adware-centric ecosystem.
Microsoft. They create software. They still have an XBox, but so far it's pretty narrowly specialized, although work is underway to push into the media entertainment sector (and not just hardcore gamers). This is a huge software monster. It is so strong that the hundredth iceberg does not sink it. Their software was so popular that, by inertia, most of the world's population chooses Windows, that's what they get to make money on. Thanks to the fact that in the 80s "640 KB is enough for everyone", this is a marketing corporation, they literally pump products to their customers, and many of them do not even think about alternatives.
Facebook has nothing at all but socially-oriented advertising. Like Google, they make millions from ads. But their advertising is focused on a group of people, it is difficult for them to seek out the preferences of each of their users separately. That is why they were waiting for a failure at the IPO, which in fact is not a failure, but a very natural thing.
If you think about it, the question arises, what is the difference between Twitter and Rovio from Apple and MS. Both of them have super-profits, which Western capitalism has been striving for so much. But twitter has a team of at least 100 people, Apple has thousands, if not dozens. Rovio has a dozen other designers, and a dozen other programmers, MS has a hundred other times more. Therefore, the profit per person in the team is approximately equal. But Apple and MS were purposeful, and Twitter and Rovio won the jackpot.
But even if you choose the same area as one of the existing IT giants and start competing with them, this does not mean that you will be neglected. No one will (I hope) throw mud at you, at least not justified. Perhaps you're just creating your own sub-market, just like Twitter didn't compete with Facebook, but relied on tags, feeds, and short messages heavily coded. The market is huge, there is a place for many, although yes, not for everyone.

Answer 4

They say ideas are worthless. Before Google, there were also search engines. But Google has made a super search engine. Yes, and Google does not make money on search, it makes money on advertising (and this is not search). Rather, he uses the search as something not basic, located on the sidelines, but also helping him to capitalize on the context.

Answer 5

Can. But remember the history of the giants of the IT industry. They all started with a New Idea, which has no analogues. Creativity is not quite the same. If you have some idea that has no analogues, do not share it. There are a lot of plagiarists and as history shows - you just give all the success into the wrong hands. I wish you success:)

Answer 6

Maybe. Even in Russia. Von Durov was able to, despite the presence of Facebook.

Answer 7

It is possible in new markets if there is a suitable material base.

Answer 8

If there is an IDEA, then why not

Answer 9

There are a lot of ideas, but no one is able to implement them. In my community for 2 years of chatter about everything, there were about 50 real ideas, but people on the Internet could not create them, because such ideas are not created through Internet connections. Even copy ideas can be successful if the idea is properly implemented. And this requires resources and a lot, because newcomers will be 5 or more years behind the current leaders.
Even to make Roy No. 2 - perhaps there is a demand, but it’s rather hemorrhoids, you just can’t find it, you can’t assemble an editorial without financial investments. (I want to do it someday :))
Everyone who says "I need an idea" simply does not have the opportunity and means to create a worthy project. That is why they are waiting for a free market, a new idea.

Answer 10

I have ideas, but they cost a lot of effort and money, and in the meantime, the years go by and game over is also just around the corner...

Answer 11

really everything. even without investments and knees