Why is that many (including me) drum up about 2.0 a lot. Why is that we leave what we have in the so called 1.0 and move onto the next version. After all if you look at it isn’t that all the existing businesses will close down tomorrow. Infact there is so much 1.0 business that exists to be done out there that many a times there is no real reason required to move to the next version. For instance in the mobile world there are only 2.5 billion cell phone users in the world of a population of 6.5+ billion. Thus there is market gap of 4 billion (it is 2 billion if we discard 50% assuming that they are economically so challenged that they will not be able to afford a phone even if handed out free ) to address for the mobile 1.0 players, then why bother a mobile 2.0. If you agree with me that a change from 1.0 to 2.0 is huge shift and not just an incremental one then the reason is very easy to see. During any huge change there is turbulence and thus a huge shakeout, those who had huge advantage due to status quo no more have that advantage. Think of it this way when there is big calamity (earthquake, war, flood) the rich and the poor are all affected the same. What else is the literal meaning of disruptive. In the rebuilding phase is all are alike and have similar chance to build up new things. And for smaller guys there is relatively higher chance of succeeding in the new turbulent conditions as he is not relatively disadvantaged.
An interesting read in the related context would be Rajiv’s account of the discussion at Mobile Monday on how difficult it is for a small developer to get his content/application hosted in a telecom network which is a mobile 1.0 play.