Last week, a customer asked me for some advice...
"Should we renew our EDR contract or use Microsoft Defender?"
If you read Market Dynamics and Malware Detection, you will already know my answer.
But this made me think about how we buy IT products and services.
To recap.
As activities - like detecting malware - become more certain and more common, they go through four evolutionary phases.
If you buy or authorise technology spending, you will spot where the latest sales pitch fits.
Virtual Reality headsets in the classroom or eSports instead of outdoor sports... Genesis.
AI-based marketing... Custom Built.
Phones and Laptops for staff... Commodity (+utility).
This is a model I've worked with for over a decade, and in that time, I've noticed patterns in how I make buying decisions.
Oddly - people become incredibly passionate about their choice of commodity and utility tech.
Take laptops and phones, for example.
From a business viewpoint, it makes no difference whether you choose an iPhone or an Android...
A Windows, Mac or Chromebook...
They are just tools.
But there are, without doubt, tribes around each.
And those tribes can hold different understandings of - What's good enough.
Take the most commoditised thing you use each day - electricity.
Few people consider the quality of the electricity coming from the socket.
But hospitals spend hundreds of thousands to ensure noise-free electricity is in their CAT and MRI scanners.
And audiophiles may choose to spend $27,995 on a power conditioner to make the sound perfect.
So, what's good enough for the majority isn't always sufficient in specialist tribes.
And so - what of our customer's question - "Should we renew our EDR contract or use Microsoft Defender?"
To avoid tribal and opinionated decision-making, our customer has adopted a data-driven process.
Before a significant change, evidence must be provided.
And so - I gathered data from various review sites.
When it came to detection rates - one scored 5.9, the other 6.0.
And the performance impact of the software - one was 17% slower, the other 19% slower.
The products were effectively the same.
Both were good enough.
The difference, however...
One was a significant cost - and a 3-year tie-in.
The other was included as an add-on to a license - they were already paying for...
What could have been a tense and opinionated became a simple economic choice.