Comparison
Design-in intelligence compared with technographics.
Technographic data lists the technology a company runs: web frameworks, analytics, CRM, cloud services. It is collected from websites, DNS, job postings and integrations, and it is sold per company.
It was built for selling software to companies. A component sits inside a product, which is a different place to look.
What each one sees.
The closest a technographic dataset comes to hardware is design tools and toolchains named in job postings.
| Technographics | Design-in intelligence | |
|---|---|---|
| Unit | Company | Product |
| Sees | Software and services the company operates | Requirements of the product and, where evidence exists, the device inside |
| Collected from | Websites, DNS, scripts, integrations, postings | Datasheets, filings, teardowns, postings, trade press |
| Hardware inside a product | Not covered | The subject |
| Design tools in use | Sometimes, from postings | Recorded as a company-level signal, kept apart from product evidence |
| Update cycle | Continuous crawl | Per run, per application class |
Toolchains are a hint, not an answer.
If a company's engineers use one vendor's design tools, they probably build on that vendor's devices. That is worth knowing and it is a company-level fact. It does not say which product contains which device, and it is handled that way.
Knowing which device families a team can already work with, which affects how hard a switch would be.
Filling the incumbent field on a product. In testing, the extraction step refused to do that from company-level evidence, by design.
If you sell a component.
- Technographics tells you about the company's software
- Your part goes into their product
- The evidence has to be about the product
Design-in intelligence · Compared with intent data · Compared with lead databases · Job posting signals
Discuss your application class