

Can Indian Society produce Gates/Larry/Zuckerberg? - bootload
http://www.pluggd.in/2008/07/microsoft-facebook-google-from-india-can-indian-society-produce-gates-larry-zuckerburg

======
aston
Funny, I assumed Larry = Ellison, not Page. Either way, can't believe
Zuckerberg is being compared to those guys... Let's at least wait until
Facebook IPO's or makes a billion dollars.

~~~
unalone
He made a tool that a million billion people are using, and he managed to go
up against a behemoth of a competitor and still win. Facebook is a vast
success, regardless of its profits, because nearly everybody in its intended
demographic uses it, and most people NOT in that demographic are starting to.

~~~
jrockway
It's hard to find a lot of respect for someone who steals his employer's idea
and makes billions off it. I mean, I guess that's OK in this "money is
everything" society ("he's rich!!11!"), but that doesn't mean I have to like
it.

~~~
eugenejen
Doesn't everyone think execution is more important than idea alone? Even he
stole the idea, but after he unveiled his site, he definitely could not steal
the idea from connectU any more. So if founders of ConnectU really competed
their service against Facebook with a better product, will Facebook be like
today? I guess most likely they were just sat and waited and maybe did not
treat it seriously until it was too late.

And we see ConnectU's founders are much better in enjoy life outside their
startup.

~~~
ali_
It is not always about having the better product; more a matter of traction.
Case in point, why do so many people still use Twitter?

~~~
eugenejen
Because no one is really competing with Twitter on the exact same product
category at the moment. Pownce and Friendfeed are different to Twitter.

I think the idea of traction is very dangerous. It gives an excuse for losing
competitors to sooth their fragile hearts. But if you believe market is
efficient and ruthless and if you agree that users vote with their browsers in
Web 2.0 world, then the failure of the competitors should be attributed more
to failing to give what users want than the winner has more traction!

Case in point? Google Search vs. Hotbot Search vs. Alta Vista Search vs.
Windows Live Search and Yahoo! Search in U.S.

~~~
andreyf
_But if you believe market is efficient and ruthless and if you agree that
users vote with their browsers in Web 2.0 world..._

Markets are nice and all, and entry costs are lower than they used to be, but
there are still such things as brand and users still have habits.

Case in point? eBay.

~~~
eugenejen
I am still in doubt that we just use "brand" and "habits" to cover the core
questions in our thinking.

In the case of Ebay, what a buyer and a seller wants in common is there is a
large pools of users in the site. So they have better chance to find the other
end of the transaction. So even though currently eBay can't satisfy its users
in different aspects, but they have the most important element in auction: a
lot of users. This is the same for dating sites.

So to build a new competitor against eBay, the most important thing is to
figure out how to convert users in eBay to the new competitors. I guess anyone
who figure this out will reap the reward.

I just think we use "brand" and "habits" too much without reallying
understanding the reality. A successful product or service must satisfy a
demand. Even in soft drink market, where there is no difference between them.
But each one uses a "brand image" to resort to different customers'
psychology. So the product actually fulfill the need of consumers' desire to
define themselves. From this point of view, they create a product that is what
people want.

------
simplegeek
Nice article, but I would like to add couple of more things. a) Socio-economic
structure in that part of the world is complex. You graduate straight out of
school and you start thinking about your parents (in most cases Dad is near
retirement) and siblings (if you've sisters you've to get them married--i.e.
bear all expenses). b) Most people who make it to the top don't give back to
the society in terms of donation to schools. Most people don't take
initiatives that will give young kids, straight out of school, an incentive to
start a company. c) Sparse number of highly talented engineers available for
mentorship. Most talented people will tell you to focus on your grades, as
article noted. d) Government not providing any incentives to young lads to
start businesses. Cost of running a business is usually pretty high. No policy
making at that level. No subsidies. e) No academic or professional activities.
There are no meetups and it's very rare that you hear about a conference. Not
many places to meet up like-minded people (only exception is the school
itself) f) Lack of libraries. Elite usually love to read Malcolm Gladwell to
remain in the Groove. Rare are the people(that I'm aware of) who like to keep
abreast of latest trends. Though situation is improving but you won't find
many modern classics (engineering or otherwise) in biggest library of your
town). Heavy taxes on imported books. A fellow Pakistani once told me he had
to pay heavy taxes(one third of the price of the books) on 10 books that he
ordered for his personal use.

This is what I've heard and I've also worked in that part of the world(i.e.
Pakistan) but I'm not really sure about India.

~~~
luckystrike
Read your comment after posting mine above. Your first point (Socio-economic
structure) is quite correct for India as well.

But as of today, things are changing, and i guess the other points really do
not apply as much as probably they might have 20 years back.

~~~
simplegeek
Well, other points still hold to some degree. Just consider the political
instability most countries around India are going through right now. That is
not a decent sight. India is still lucky in that lots of high profile
companies have offices there but it's yet to happen in Pakistan. There are
very few, if any. Microsoft has presence in Pakistan but it's mostly dealing
with Government contracts and selling to Enterprise. No development offices of
Yahoo, Microsoft, Google and alike. Overall, situation is more complex than
one could imagine.

------
enra
"Don’t put so much of your time in these hobby project ..make sure your
academic don’t suffer"

Reminds me when we had a job opening and some indian guy applied for it with a
fourteen page long resume.

What is it with these people and their obsession for academics and
credentials?

~~~
luckystrike
The obsession with 'degrees' (and less risk taking in general) is an
unfortunate byproduct of a highly controlled and regulated economy till 1991.
Setting up a business, and earning a decent living for yourself (and your
extended family most of the times) was extremely difficult before that time.
Doing a 'white collar' job was the safest and the most feasible option and the
road to that passed through a person being 'educated' (read have a degree).
Hence the strong focus on getting a degree, as it was the way to earn your
bread.(literally)

Thankfully, things changed from 1991 onwards, from what we call here as
'economic liberalization' (loosening of government controls and restrictions).
Add to that more exposure/integration with the 'west' through media/internet
and now the attitudes towards business/learning/other activities are changing.

The change will take time, and it's just my guess that the next generation
that really doesn't have to worry about the basic issues of life as much would
be far more risk taking, and would be doing more game changing things,
relative to what's being done today.

I remember one of PG's essay where he mentioned his reasons of why some of the
other places cannot replicate a 'Silicon Valley'. If i remember correctly, his
take on Bangalore/India was that inherently since the country is still poor,
it would be very difficult for it replicate the valley culture at this point
at least. (He used an example of uneven steps on a railway station in that
essay). His reasoning is not wide off the mark.

But as i said, we are very optimistic, things are gonna get way better, way
sooner.

~~~
bootload
_"... What is it with these people and their obsession for academics and
credentials? ..."_

Extreme competition, limited opportunity and rigid social hierarchy.

~~~
gaius
It is 40x harder to get into IIT than it is MIT, and they've still not sorted
their caste system. I can't understand why there isn't more outrage about that
in the West; it's worse than Apartheid ever was.

~~~
luckystrike

       they've still not sorted their caste system
    

The trouble is that it is too sorted. :-). But on a serious note, economic
development on the whole can help a long way in removing social evils as well.
Some things might appear simple and logical to improve, but it ain't easy
given the 'diversity' (and number!) of people in our country.

------
patrickg-zill
There are already hugely influential Indian businessmen, but they are not in
IT. Consider Mittal, a very large steel company. However there is a cultural
component to success in software or Internet services - the best thing you
could do to encourage Indian success would be to get more Indians connected to
broadband.

~~~
andreyf
_Consider Mittal, a very large steel company._

Isn't the value what a steel company produces already laying inside of the
ground? Making money off of natural resources seems to require connections in
government more so than it does skill or innovation.

~~~
gaius
Not really - Mittal's skill has been in buying up loss making mills and
turning them around. Their core skill is in training people to operate
existing mills more efficiently.

Secondly, you don't know much about steel. For a start it is not "already
laying inside the ground" (go on, find me a "steel mine" somewhere). It's not
one thing either; there are countless alloys, and every customer wants
something slightly different. Steel is a manufacturing business like any
other. You might as well say the products of a bakery are just growing in a
field somewhere.

------
aneesh
There are several hugely successful Indian entrepreneurs: Lakshmi Mittal,
Sunil Mittal (no relation), Dhirubhai Ambani. Even in IT, there is Azim Premji
& Narayana Murthy. But the entrepreneurial culture is still not there - all of
these people bucked significant cultural norms.

I had dinner with Sunil Mittal once last year, and he had a constant stream of
stories about how the Indian government regulations are so restrictive for
aspiring entrepreneurs. Apparently you couldn't import touchtone phones at one
point, so he had to have them disassembled & shipped separately to different
places just so he could sell them in India. Indian trade policy has gotten
better, but there's still room to improve.

~~~
aswanson
It seems as though if they could just mitigate government interference they
could easily surpass China economically. Why don't the elected officials
realize that?

------
theashworld
I think the single biggest factor is fear of failure. And it's mostly because
of society (but other factors too). If you start something in India and fail,
you are forever termed as a failure. No one moves on - anywhere you go, your
failure follows you. The stigma is unbearable to live with.

Given this scenario, getting a 'safe' job and earn money working for someone
else is the better option for most.

------
zandorg
Not sure if it's been brought up, but Jobs went on a trip to India around his
college years and had an 'ashram'.

<http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=408258>

------
nose
Yes. Sridhar Vembu and Zoho.com

------
andreyf
Zuckerberg does not deserve to be next to Gates/Larry...

