Compatibility of Software Platforms

  • Thomas Widjaja
  • Peter Buxmann


In the software industry, as well as in numerous other IT industries, products are often offered as systems consisting of complementary components (Gawer and Henderson 2007). In this context, specific components take on the role of software platforms, and around these platforms so-called ecosystems evolve. Evans et al. (2006) describe a software platform as “a software program that makes services available to other software programs through Application Programming Interfaces (APIs)”.2 Jansen et al. (2009) define such an ecosystem around a platform as “a set of actors functioning as a unit and interacting with a shared market for software and services, together with the relationships among them. These relationships are frequently underpinned by a common technological platform or market and operate through the exchange of information, resources, and artifacts.” The idea of offering software systems, which are based on platforms, in combination with complementary products from an “ecosystem” is applied throughout the software industry. This is not a new phenomenon: Around the first operating systems, “ecosystems” of applications had already evolved. Current examples for developing ecosystems are both Apple, with the AppStore, and Google, with the Android Marketplace. A similar constellation can be found in the area of service-oriented architectures (SOA): SOA services from different vendors can be integrated on the basis of SOA platforms. Moreover, the evolvement of ecosystems is observable in the Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) market (Cusumano 2010a; Cusumano 2010b).


Network Effect Software Platform Graph Type Service Layer Complementary Product 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Albert, R., and Barabási, A. 2000. "Topology of Evolving Networks: Local Events and Universality", Physical Review Letters (85:24), pp. 5234–5237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arndt, J.-M., Kude, T., and Dibbern, J. 2008a. "The Emergence of Partnership Networks in the Enterprise Application Development Industry - a Global Corporation Perspective", in: 20th World Computer Congress (WCC). Mailand, Italien.Google Scholar
  3. Arndt, J.-M., Kude, T., and Dibbern, J. 2008b. "The Emergence of Partnership Networks in the Enterprise Application Software Industry – an SME Perspective", in: Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik 2008 (PRIMIUM). Garching, Deutschland.Google Scholar
  4. Arzideh, F. 2008. Estimation of Medical Reference Limits by Truncated Gaussian and Truncated Power Normal Distributions. Bremen: Universität Bremen (Dissertation).Google Scholar
  5. Buxmann, P. 2002. "Strategien Von Standardsoftware-Anbietern: Eine Analyse Auf Der Basis Von Netzeffekten", Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung (54), pp. 442–457.Google Scholar
  6. Buxmann, P., Hess, T., and Lehmann, S. 2008. "Software as a Service", Wirtschaftsinformatik (50:6), pp. 500–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cusumano, M. 2010a. "Cloud Computing and SaaS as New Computing Platforms", Commun. ACM (53:4), pp. 27–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cusumano, M.A. 2010b. "Will SaaS and Cloud Computing Become a New Industry Platform?", in Software-as-a-Service, A. Benlian, T. Hess and P. Buxmann (eds.). Gabler, pp. 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. David, P.A., and Greenstein, S. 1990. "The Economics of Compatibility Standards: An Introduction to Recent Research", Economics of Innovation and New Technology (1:1), pp. 3–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Domschke, W., Mayer, G., and Wagner, B. 2002. "Effiziente Modellierung Von Entscheidungsproblemen: Das Beispiel Des Standardisierungsproblems", Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung (72:8), pp. 847–863.Google Scholar
  11. Erdős, P., and Rényi, A. 1959. "On Random Graphs", Publicationes Mathematicae Debrecen (6), pp. 290–297.Google Scholar
  12. Evans, D.S., Hagiu, A., and Schmalensee, R. 2006. Invisible Engines: How Software Platforms Drive Innovation and Transform Industries. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Farrell, J., and Saloner, G. 1992. "Converters, Compatibility, and the Control of Interfaces", The Journal of Industrial Economics (40:1), pp. 9–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gandal, N. 2002. "Compatibility, Standardization, and Network Effects: Some Policy Implications", Oxford Review of Economic Policy (18:1), pp. 80–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gawer, A., and Henderson, R. 2007. "Platform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel", Journal of Economics and Management Strategy (16), pp. 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hilkert, D., Benlian, A., and Hess, T. 2010. "Motivational Drivers to Develop Apps for Social Software-Platforms: The Example of Facebook", in: 16th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2010). Lima, Peru.Google Scholar
  17. Jansen, S., Brinkkemper, S., and Finkelstein, A. 2009. "Business Network Management as a Survival Strategy: A Tale of Two Software Ecosystems", First International Workshop on Software Ecosystems, Virginia, pp. 34–48.Google Scholar
  18. Johnson, A., and Thomopoulos, N. 2002. "Characteristics and Tables of the Left-Truncated Normal Distribution", in: Midwest Decision Sciences. San Diego, California: pp. 133–139.Google Scholar
  19. Katz, M.L., and Shapiro, C. 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility", The American Economic Review (75:3), pp. 424–440.Google Scholar
  20. Katz, M.L., and Shapiro, C. 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects", Journal of Economic Perspectives (8:2), pp. 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Koski, H., and Kretschmer, T. 2004. "Survey on Competing in Network Industries: Firm Strategies, Market Outcomes, and Policy Implications", Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade (4:1), pp. 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Köster, D. 1999. Wettbewerb in Netzproduktmärkten. Gabler, Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  23. Kude, T., and Dibbern, J. 2009. "Tight Versus Loose Organizational Coupling within Inter-Firm Networks in the Enterprise Software Industry – the Perspective of Complementors", in: Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS). San Francisco, USA.Google Scholar
  24. Leone, F.C., Nelson, L.S., and Nottingham, R.B. 1961. "The Folded Normal Distribution", Technometrics (3:4), pp. 543–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liebowitz, S.J., and Margolis, S.E. 1994. "Network Externality: An Uncommon Tragedy", The Journal of Economic Perspectives (8:2), pp. 133–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Matutes, C., and Regibeau, P. 1996. "A Selective Review of the Economics of Standardization: Entry Deterrence, Technological Progress and International Competition", European Journal of Political Economy (12:2), pp. 183–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Newman, M.E.J., and Watts, D.J. 1999. "Scaling and Percolation in the Small-World Network Model", Physical Review E (60:6), p. 7332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rochet, J.-C., and Tirole, J. 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets", Journal of the European Economic Association (1:4), pp. 990–1029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rysman, M. 2009. "The Economics of Two-Sided Markets", The Journal of Economic Perspectives (23:3), pp. 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schade, S., Strube, J., and Buxmann, P. 2007. "Simulation of the Impact of Network Topologies on Standardization Decisions", in: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Standardization, Innovation and Information Technology (SIIT), P.M. Fen, Dan; Hawkings, Richard (ed.). Calgary, Kanada pp. 59–70.Google Scholar
  31. Watts, D., and Strogatz, S. 1998. "Collective Dynamics of ’Small-World’ Networks", Nature (393), pp. 440–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Weitzel, T. 2004. Economics of Standards in Information Networks. Heidelberg: Physica.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Weitzel, T., Beimborn, D., and König, W. 2006. "A Unified Economic Model of Standard Diffusion: The Impact of Standardization Cost, Network Effects, and Network Topology", Management Information Systems Quarterly (30:Special Issue on Standard Making), pp. 489–514.Google Scholar
  34. Weitzel, T., Wendt, O., and Westarp, F. 2000. "Reconsidering Network Effect Theory", in: 8th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS). Wien, Österreich.Google Scholar
  35. West, J. 2003. "How Open Is Open Enough? Melding Proprietary and Open Source Platform Strategies", Research Policy (32:7), pp. 1259–1285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wiese, H. 1990. Netzeffekte Und Kompatibilität: Ein Theoretischer Und Simulationsgeleiteter Beitrag Zur Absatzpolitik Für Netzeffekt-Güter. Stuttgart: Poeschel.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technische Universität DarmstadtDarmstadtGermany

Personalised recommendations