MSNBC STory on Boise Tech
In case you haven’t seen it yet: http://tinyurl.com/375cr6 MSNBC ran their story on Boise being the next big thing in tech. The web clip ran about 3 minutes, I don’t know if that was the whole thing or not but I think it was a good story. What did you think?
Great story, but I worry that things like this may be used as an excuses by elected officials to not help with (or in many cases stand in the way of)efforts to help the Idaho tech community. They can point to things like this and say “see we are doing just fine”, but in reality there is a lot more that can be done to help nurture baby ideas into successful startups.
I do find it ironic that they only interviewed tech companies that have been shrinking in their local presence. It’s a good thing they didn’t ask any of them what there growth plans were here in Boise.
Tangentially relevant…my question is, “How is ‘tech” company defined for the purposes of discussions on this site?
I wonder if I even qualify as a “tech” company. “Technically” I’m a photographer, but I deal with Planck’s Constant, Seidel Aberrations, Diffraction Limiting, Indices of Refraction, Metamerism, Optical Modulation Transfer, Bayer Arrays, and programming/automation/animation directly and constantly.
So, please give me some context here. What defines a “tech” company for the purposes of techboise.com?
Thanks!
I think that is a great question, Leo and one that illustrates the difficulty that exists not just in Boise or in Idaho for that matter - but everywhere. When people hear ‘tech’, they think computers. There is a connotation to the word - especially if ‘high tech’ is used. In my opinion, the conversation should be around innovation and added value - this would include processes, systems, and ideas as well as hardware, software and what the public thinks of as ‘tech’. It also expands the community affected and involved to include the traditional industries - each of which uses innovation to compete globally.
Thanks, Krissa. In January I launched another company that is producing animation for mobile devices…meaning, programming, but with the only programming language that (to my knowledge) uses graphical objects-it’s specifically constructed to control animation. I was hoping it might be force-fit into some definition of high tech…
The reason I axe is that I am involved with a number of companies and individuals who are decidedly high-tech, to my way of thinking, but because their fields aren’t considered particularly innovative (civil engineering, law enforcement), or “sexy” (programming, intellectual law), they would perhaps not feel invited into the circle of friends that your site would likely be presumed to welcome.
The IT consultant I use just produced a very interesting (to say the least) surveillance device…but he’s no marketer, VC hound, etc. With the latitude your answer graciously allows, I’ll invite him to stop by this site and make himself known.
He’s an interesting example-independent IT consultant who built the device with his own money, in his garage.
…oh yes. And how could you verify that I really am an entrepreneur/small business owner
Simply look at the posting time: 3:00am on Saturday morning…and I’m not an insomniac.
!
Leo- “tech” has now become a pretty broad term. I prefer the Buckminster Fuller approach that “technology” is anything human use to manage their environment. Tech can even be intangible.
When I was in grad school, I noticed that the NSF defined “high tech” industries as those with consistently high ratios of R&D to sales. And there was a distinct clustering that made sense. However, it didn’t count process R&D (under GAAP, you only broke out product R&D)
This suggested a bias toward “new” rather than “high” - lasers wree no longer high tech, ’cause a 12 yr old can make one now. Anyway, it all gets way too complicated, but novelty/uniqueness is what’s important (and not necessarily the technical sophistication required).
But novelty without utility is the proverbial solution looking for a problem.
I prefer the broader Fuller-esque definition of “tech” as being innovative tools that add novel/unique value (a la KW above). So, yes, Leo… you are a “tech” firm, but I’d rather hear that you are a….
a positive cashflow firm!
Not to worry about cash flow, Norris. There’s a two-page article on our finances in the December, 2004 Entrepreneur Magazine, and it’s only gotten better since then. Company name is Idaho Airships, Inc. We’re a micro, but one heck of a healthy micro.
The NSF function “clustering” is interesting-I haven’t read about it. I’d have been more topic-oriented but I have my prejudices coming out of the pharmaceutical industry. No, my predispositions are not chemically generated…ahem.
I always think of exceptions…I’m not a contrarian…but novelty: Pet Rock, Frisbee, Hula-Hoop, Yo-Yo. Not quite in the “tech” realm. I’d love to find some way to define a species of capability or knowledge on top of novelty…but it exceeds me. Will there be another strictly analogue wave following iPods and Blackberrys? I suppose no…sigh…so perhaps my concerns are moot.
I do hope you’ll put together some coffees or such as mentioned in another thread. I work in a very esoteric industry (I’m the only full-timer in the state of Idaho that I know of) and am diversifying a couple of issues…I love to pick other people’s brains because of the famine in my office seat, ifyaknowwhaddimean…