Timothy F. Bresnahan
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Timothy F. Bresnahan has a total of 2 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- John Richardsb1 shared publication
- Shane Greenstein
Department of Management and Strategy, Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA. s
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 1 December 1999
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of the Japanese and International Economies
- Vol. 13 (4) , 336-371
Local and Global Competition in Information Technology
- 1 December 1999
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of the Japanese and International Economies
- Vol. 13 (4) , 336-371
Open AccessLocal and Global Competition in Information Technology
- 27 March 1999
- Published by Wiley in The Journal of Industrial Economics
- Vol. 47 (1) , 1-40
Technological Competition and the Structure of the Computer Industry
We examine thirty years of computer industry market structure. Our analysis explains the persistence of dominant computer firms, their recent decline, and the changing success of competitive entry. It emphasizes the importance of technological competition between computer ‘platforms’, not firms. This aspect of competition has changed little over time. Two things did change. Young platforms serving newly founded segments eventually challenged established platforms across segment boundaries through a process of indirect entry. Vertically disintegrated platforms have led to divided technical leadership in important segments. The result is an industry with far more technological competition.
- 27 March 1999
- Published by Wiley in The Journal of Industrial Economics
- Vol. 47 (1) , 1-40
Technological Competition and the Structure of the Computer Industry
We examine thirty years of computer industry market structure. Our analysis explains the persistence of dominant computer firms, their recent decline, and the changing success of competitive entry. It emphasizes the importance of technological competition between computer ‘platforms’, not firms. This aspect of competition has changed little over time. Two things did change. Young platforms serving newly founded segments eventually challenged established platforms across segment boundaries through a process of indirect entry. Vertically disintegrated platforms have led to divided technical leadership in important segments. The result is an industry with far more technological competition.