[It thinking] how much of a technology leader is good?

Frankly speaking, a lot of companies that do technology always feel that the better the technology, the better the "bull". However, history has also appeared, many companies are really good technology, but the market response to the general (to be supplemented by the case). The results are conceivable.

You know, every new technology, especially industry-leading new technology, need a lot of manpower, material to ensure. So there is no market ahead, it will mean a lot of waste.

Today's Microsoft, since Satya came to power, I was also thinking, need not so fast iteration, we really need Windows Server 2012,2016 more or 2018?

In fact, Satya in the face of customer-oriented also made a lot of efforts.

A lot of Microsoft's products have a smiley face, welcome customers to make feedback. This avoids the disconnect between product technology and customer demand.

Frankly speaking, technically ahead of the opponent, just a little bit better, unless you want to swallow the whole market, but sometimes it is not a cost-effective thing, many times, you see the first person will be a man to leave a small brother there sparring.

Cisco, Ju**r; Sorry, no offense, just for example.

[It thinking] how much of a technology leader is good?