I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree. For launching a new technology service, generally adoption follows a pattern: technologists (people who like tech for its own sake), then visionaries in the market itself – who use the tech to boost their own career and get an 'unfair advantage' over their peers, then the chasm. Then come pragmatists, who require social proof from peers in their market, and then conservatives, who require a full service solution (all the complements must exist, such as a support infrastructure). Finally, the laggards, who will only move to a new solution when they are absolutely forced to, such as when the incumbent discontinues support for its offering.
This has all been formulated in great strong detail in the book Crossing The Chasm. Maybe if you are implementing a 'commodity' service that is innovative in absolutely no way whatsoever, you can skip the technologists, but there is such a strong community of online entrepreneurs with a great support ecosystem that I recommend everyone take advantage of it. The only problem is that you have to pay to play – not in terms of money, but in terms of contribution (sharing what you know and helping others). In this case definitely, you really reap what you sow in the karma bank.
This has all been formulated in great strong detail in the book Crossing The Chasm. Maybe if you are implementing a 'commodity' service that is innovative in absolutely no way whatsoever, you can skip the technologists, but there is such a strong community of online entrepreneurs with a great support ecosystem that I recommend everyone take advantage of it. The only problem is that you have to pay to play – not in terms of money, but in terms of contribution (sharing what you know and helping others). In this case definitely, you really reap what you sow in the karma bank.