[rk17]

I basically disagree with the article, here is why:

Although it's true that disruption is not always caused by technology - you could argue that the Sears mail-order catalogue system was a disruption through the business/distribution model -, many disruptions like the radio, the internet, the smartphone etc. have been made possible by technology.

There is also a third area of disruption; namely in product design. Simply making a new consumption paradigm feasible (lack of frustration in use) for the majority of people can cause a shift in the market. Which is very profitable. Ask the guys at Apple.

I really still do like my Ipod, even though I don't have it anymore.

So I think the article paints a misleadingly simplified picture.