Skip to content
Bits&Chips
×
×
About
Memberships
Advertising
Magazines
Videos
Contact

Log in

Jan Bosch is a research center director, professor, consultant and angel investor in startups. You can contact him at jan@janbosch.com.

Opinion

Outdated distinction: products vs services

31 March 2025
Reading time: 5 minutes

With digitalization and many product companies adopting DevOps, Jan Bosch sees the distinction with service companies become irrelevant.

For the better part of well over a century, companies would classify themselves as product- or service-oriented. Product companies often were high-margin businesses with high volatility as the investment in product R&D was largely fixed, but the sales and margins were very much influenced by the competitive landscape, the economic climate and the capabilities of the product. Service companies, on the other hand, were often low-margin businesses with much lower volatility as many customers could delay buying a product when times weren’t good, but a daily, weekly or monthly service was needed independent of the economy, revenue and profit.

Especially product companies that sold pure software products were incredibly profitable as the reproduction cost of software is, for all practical purposes, zero. So, selling the product to one customer or to a million customers created almost the same cost base, but the revenue was a million times higher in the latter case.

One of the main differences between product and service companies was the customer relation. Many product companies would sell their widget and then have no contact with the customer, except for pesky support calls, until it was time to try to win the customer again and sell them their next widget. Service companies, on the other hand, had a continuous relationship with their customers, who were receiving the service on a continuous basis.

A second main difference was the business model used by both types of businesses. Product companies got paid for the product at the point of sale and all variable costs incurred to produce, ship and install the product were paid for early on. Each product sale of course also contributed to the fixed cost, such as the R&D investment, but by and large, a product company would generate revenue early whereas customers would have to amortize their investment over the economic lifetime of the product.

Service companies, on the other hand, would have to absorb any expenses associated with bringing a new customer on board and amortize these expenses throughout the customer relationship. They typically had a continuous business model where the customer paid regularly for the service offered. Of course, many service companies looked to charge an onboarding fee to offset any initial cost, but the primary revenue and profit were generated continuously.

The third main difference was the R&D investment required. For product companies, the investment was traditionally done before the start of production (SOP). Once the manufacturing process was up and running, the preference was to avoid changes as much as possible as any change would upset the manufacturing process, which would decrease productivity and cause issues both for manufacturing and post-deployment support. Any requests from customers for new capabilities would typically not affect the current product but be used to inform the next product. In the classical triangle of technology advancedness, cost and customer intimacy, product companies generally prefer to focus on technology advancedness and use cost as a fallback strategy.

Service companies, on the other hand, were typically investing continuously in improving the efficiency of their service process and responding to changing customer preferences. This means that they were continuously adapting themselves to the changing needs of their customers. In the aforementioned triangle, many service companies focus on customer intimacy as the key differentiator.

Digitalization and continuous value delivery are changing the dichotomy quite fundamentally

Digitalization and the continuous value delivery that’s now expected by many customers are changing the product-service dichotomy quite fundamentally. Many product companies increasingly act as service companies and many service companies are increasingly adopting approaches that traditionally would be considered to be more akin to product companies. As a consequence, the difference between the two types of businesses is largely disappearing.

When a product company adopts DevOps, it basically commits to what for all practical purposes is a service in which the customer is provided with continuously improving performance of the product. This means that the customer relationship is changing from transactional and often more adversarial to continuous and often more collaborative. In the process, the product company becomes increasingly involved in the customer’s business and, based on this improved understanding, will focus more and more on improving the customer’s KPIs.

The business model of many product companies I work with is also changing. Although most seek to keep the upfront, transactional revenue when the customer buys the product, the continuous cost associated with providing continuous deployment of new software tends to lead to a situation where they also want a continuous revenue stream to cover the cost. Some companies go one step further and offer their product as a service. The most ambitious ones change their business model to align with the customer’s KPIs. In the latter case, new software deployments that result in improved performance of the product for the customer will also result in more revenue for the company.

In this case, however, the product company is almost indistinguishable from a service company. It gets no revenue upfront and has to finance the onboarding of the customer and the cost associated with deploying the product and then ensure that it generates sufficient revenue during the lifetime of the customer to remain profitable.

The transition from an upfront, transactional model to a continuous revenue model is often referred to as the belly of the fish, due to the shape of the cost and revenue curves. When transitioning, the revenue drops dramatically for a while as the company no longer gets paid upfront. At the same time, costs tend to go up as all kinds of R&D and other activities are required to serve the customers in a different way. Over time, the continuous revenue starts to grow, the one-time costs drop off and the company becomes profitable again. However, it’s a painful process for most companies and one of the reasons the digital transformation of many companies and industries is ridiculously slow and painful.

At the same time, in my experience, many traditional service companies are increasingly ‘productizing’ their offering. By standardizing the offering, providing a limited set of options and associating fixed pricing models with different service offerings and configurations, they’re adopting some of the playbook traditionally used by product companies. The result is that product and service companies are becoming virtually indistinguishable.

Traditionally, there were very clear differences between product and service companies. These differences included the nature of the customer relationship, the business model and the type and timing of R&D investments. With digitalization and many product companies adopting DevOps, this distinction is becoming irrelevant. Both types have a continuous relationship with the customer, use continuous business models and need to invest in R&D continuously. To end with a quote from Steve Jobs: “You’ve got to start with the customer experience and work back toward the technology – not the other way around.” It doesn’t matter whether you view yourself as a product or a service company; in the end, it’s about serving the customer in the best way possible.

Related content

Machines that think: the design loop

Summit in Delft addresses Europe’s shortage of systems thinkers

Top jobs
Your vacancy here?
View the possibilities
in the media kit
Events
Courses
Headlines
  • Summit in Delft addresses Europe’s shortage of systems thinkers

    26 October 2026
  • Micron rules out 4F² DRAM in favor of continued scaling and 3D transition

    22 October 2026
  • Nvidia moves optical engines onto interposer

    22 October 2026
  • Melexis selects Neways for pressure sensor packaging

    22 October 2026
  • Amsterdam quantum venture wins Photondelta contest with chip-based atomic clock

    21 October 2026
  • Photon Bridge raises €10M to scale lasers for AI interconnects

    21 October 2026
  • Intel pitches 300mm silicon photonics with integrated InP lasers

    20 October 2026
  • New Origin photonics fab clears power and water hurdles

    20 October 2026
  • Quantinuum reports error correction advance toward 2029 quantum computer

    20 October 2026
  • Chinese startup presents 15-watt EUV source prototype

    19 October 2026
  • Terafab reportedly to receive first ASML EUV scanner in mid-2027

    19 October 2026
  • Cloud giants’ capital spending to exceed $1.5T in 2027

    19 October 2026
  • Fab construction on the rise to meet AI demand

    14 October 2026
  • ASML considers further capacity expansion beyond existing growth plans

    14 October 2026
  • Eindhoven-based chip designer Sciosense acquired by China’s Fortior

    13 October 2026
  • Dutch high-tech sector calls for lasting successor to Growth Fund

    13 October 2026
  • Spectacell raises 6 million euros for chip-based cell imaging

    12 October 2026
  • Globalfoundries targets physical AI with new FD-SOI platform

    12 October 2026
  • Besi and Applied deepen packaging collaboration

    6 October 2026
  • Xiver secures €28M for production expansion

    5 October 2026
Bits&Chips logo

Bits&Chips strengthens the high tech ecosystem in the Netherlands and Belgium and makes it healthier by supplying independent knowledge and information.

Bits&Chips focuses on news and trends in embedded systems, electronics, mechatronics and semiconductors. Our coverage revolves around the influence of technology.

Advertising
Subscribe
Events
Contact
Follow us on
High-Tech Systems Magazine (Dutch)
(c) Techwatch bv. All rights reserved. Techwatch reserves the rights to all information on this website (texts, images, videos, sounds), unless otherwise stated.
  • About
  • Memberships
  • Advertising
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Search
Privacy settings

Bits&Chips uses technologies such as functional and analytical cookies to improve the user experience of the website. By consenting to the use of these technologies, we may capture (personal) data, unique identifiers, device and browser data, IP addresses, location data and browsing behavior. Want to know more about how we use your data? Please read our privacy statement.

 

Give permission or set your own preferences

Functional Always active
Functional cookies are necessary for the website to function properly. It is therefore not possible to reject or disable them.
Voorkeuren
De technische opslag of toegang is noodzakelijk voor het legitieme doel voorkeuren op te slaan die niet door de abonnee of gebruiker zijn aangevraagd.
Statistics
Analytical cookies are used to store statistical data. This data is stored and analyzed anonymously to map the use of the website. De technische opslag of toegang die uitsluitend wordt gebruikt voor anonieme statistische doeleinden. Zonder dagvaarding, vrijwillige naleving door je Internet Service Provider, of aanvullende gegevens van een derde partij, kan informatie die alleen voor dit doel wordt opgeslagen of opgehaald gewoonlijk niet worden gebruikt om je te identificeren.
Marketing
Technical storage or access is necessary to create user profiles for sending advertising or to track the user on a site or across sites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}