The Future of the Software Industry 267
madro writes "Remember 'Does IT Matter?' a while ago? Nicholas Carr is back with an editorial in today's New York Times following Microsoft's decision to dramatically reduce its cash stash. Carr's take: Microsoft is admitting it can't find better uses for its cash, due to the growing maturation of the software industry. No mention of open source, although Apple's consumer-targeted model of free iTunes driving iPod demand is one listed alternative." Reader CodeArtisan submits another piece about Microsoft's loot distribution, and Newsforge (which is part of OSDN along with Slashdot) has a story about the future of commodity software.
iTunes driving iPod!? (Score:2)
If I'm buying a nice HD based MP3 player, the last thing that will sway my decision is whether a piece of free proprietary software will work well with it.
Re:iTunes driving iPod!? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Are you kidding? I HATE iTunes! (Score:2)
Re:Are you kidding? I HATE iTunes! (Score:2)
Re:Are you kidding? I HATE iTunes! (Score:2)
Re:Are you kidding? I HATE iTunes! (Score:2)
A tech-savvy guy like yourself has trouble plugging in a cable?! That's all it takes to sync your music library in iTunes with your iPod... plug it in. Unless you have turned that option off in the preferences, in which case you are faced with the befuddling task of drag and drop. Really. Drag a song, an album, an artist, a genre or whatever selection you like and drop it on the iPod icon in the 'source' column
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:iTunes driving iPod!? (Score:2)
"Is not."
Useful, thanks.
Re:iTunes driving iPod!? (Score:2)
You have it backwards, besides. People want to make sure their MP3 player works with the software they already have.
I pity you (Score:2)
I pity you.
You worship idol of cave* and are creating paradoxical situation whereby you are _limit your freedom of choice_ while professing _free_ software.
*
http://www.comnet.ca/~pballan/Bacon(idols).h
The Problem At Hand (Score:5, Interesting)
What, did you think the timing was accidental?
--Dan
Re:The Problem At Hand (Score:2)
Re:The Problem At Hand (Score:2)
Re:The Problem At Hand (Score:3, Informative)
The real reason they are releasing cash has to do with something more fundimental. There are Securities Laws which while seldom enforced are called "Blue Sky Laws." These laws make it a serious criminal offense to sell a stock never intending to pay your investors back appropriately. Microsoft has earned a wad of cash. This is so obviously a stock fraud if they don't pay it in dividends especially since they cannot argue that they are going to grow infinitely any more that they must distribute or they wi
Re:if you are so fucking brilliant (Score:2)
Unless you're a broker, it's not good to invest based too much on short term issues like these. You invest long term and build value. If you buy and sell too much you whittle away your money in brokerage fees.
Besides, just because a company should do somthing, that doesn't mean it's going to do it.
Re:if you are so fucking brilliant (Score:2)
Right. (Score:2)
I think it's kind of disgusting... (Score:2, Insightful)
The Guardian article has an interesting idea of giving some of the money back to customers as compensation for their illegal activities and general crapiness.
I think MS needs to think about what their point is any more. Apart from making money, they're mostly just fucking up the indus
Re:I think it's kind of disgusting... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I think it's kind of disgusting... (Score:2)
It is no use saying that the computer industry is different and that computers are uniquely complicated things. It is Microsoft that has made them so complicated so it can create a profitable spiral of updates.
Suddenly microsoft has overcomplicated software?
Fourth, to redress Microsoft's smothering of competition, put 20% into a special fund to foster entrepreneurs and inventors to develop alternative products. Microsoft has made Word and Excel
Re:I think it's kind of disgusting... (Score:4, Insightful)
like it or not, money solves a lot of problems. it lets you pay competitive wages to hire the best of the best. it allows you fund the massive R&D for usability, Q&A, development and more. more money == more potential for a better product.
better judge? na. he's just agreeing with both the US justice dept and the european union, both of which have convicted microsoft of being a monopoly, and abusing those powers
so now we have the flipside of the situation today, where office formats are totally closed with no plans to open documentation on it. where mshtml totally abuses w3c specs. we have to deal with microsoft reinventing every single protocol and standard and then closing it up rather than using what already exists. they've done more work to throw a wrench into the industry than any other company in the history of business i think. no one in their right mind would claim windows is a more stable, promising os, than things like BeOS, OS X, or Linux. if all things were equal, (i.e. # of market share) all 3 of those are clear winners in stability, interoperability, and security.
so yes. microsoft HAS fucked up the industry. and it won't get any better any time soon.
The governments are disgusting... (Score:2)
The legal thing was about the browser, media player and the OS, not all of their products such as Office, Exchange, SQL Server, etc.
The EU is just jelaous they have no native major OS vendor (especially after SuSE was snapped by Novell - ouch!). The US - well the land of many lawsuits - do I need to elaborate?
The whole thing was/is laughable - a bu
Commoditization (Score:5, Insightful)
But there is very little innovation left to be had in these basic layers, so why are we being charged thousands, and even tens of thousands, for licenses? Surely not to support R&D.
It may well be that we are entering an era when we will see a great blossoming of innovation, if only because sole proactitioners and small teams can afford to the tools to tackle the kinds of problems that need to be solved today.
Exactly! (Score:5, Interesting)
Precisely. I think we are indeed going to see an explosion of software, especially niche software -- and this is possible exactly because platform software is becoming commoditized.
Nope, it's not new wisdom. It's covered by Eric Raymond in his essays and it's all over the place... but for some reason, only a few people seem to understand this.
I disagree (Score:2)
The SAP and PeopleSoft approach is a failure and there will be a huge space for using existing componentns to customize solution.
Re:I disagree (Score:2)
And the true job of a true software engineer is to
1) Capture true business advantages in software and extend them and
2) review and refactor business proesses. True software engineering also involves work in the area of Operations Research.
Sorry
Re:Commoditization (Score:2)
Actually, its not. The govt. now forces car companies to install safety equipment, forces them to perform crash testing, makes them design in a level of impact tolorance, CAFE standards insure better gas mileage, etc.
It looks basically the same, but the government has decided that its in the publics interest to pay more for cars that are safer, with or
Re:Commoditization (Score:2)
Re:Commoditization (Score:2)
I guess you're assuming no maintenance or added functionality when you say "built once". Beyond that, it's not economically feasible to sell all software 0 or 1 times. Software development requires labor and equipment just like cars do.
If an army of volunteers wanted to donate their time, equipment, and materials to build cars, cars could be "free as in be
maturation of the software industry (Score:2, Insightful)
I am dreading longhorn as much as the next guy, but one thing stands out to me: Microsoft is still a major player in the computing industry, like it or not. I think they are trying to light a fire under the hardware manufacturer's asses with the recommended [slashdot.org]
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:5, Funny)
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:2)
Not sure I'd call something that considers ALT-META-SHIFT-F1-chicken sacrifice-BKSPC-x a normal command 'consumer level' though.
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:2)
EMACS Makes Any Computer Slow...
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:2)
Larry
Unseen uses (Score:2)
There are many unseen uses for future technology. Consider the situation in 1990. Very few of us imagined that within 15 years it'd be possible for people to be editing (on HOME equipment) high fidelity video recorded by devices smaller than the average 1980's alarm clock. Very few of us thought the Internet would turn into a mass medium used for advertising wireless video cameras the size of golfballs.
Stick your head in the sand all you want,
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:2)
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:2)
Also, multi-tasking with a large number of programs can tax the CPU or the RAM -- hence the penchant for duel processor pro machines.
Garageband (Score:2)
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:2)
I have an in-law that does photo restoration/editing.
The biggest bottleneck for her isn't the CPU or ram - it's i/o to/from disk.
Hey, I told her to go SCSI, but she didn't listen
CPUs stopped being responsible for delays a long time ago. Most of the time people spend waiting is on disk or network i/o.
Re:maturation of the software industry (Score:2)
Age of Enlightenment (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Age of Enlightenment (Score:2)
Especially since Moore law still seems to hold.
At the end of last year I bought two computers, one for me and one for my father.
These are the specs and the prices :
Now use Moore's law to extrapolate (I did it backwards with all the systems I ever bought and it mostly fits).
This means that at the end of 2006 I should be able to get a system that is half the capacity of my current high-end system for 240EUR (but with 8 GHz spe
buying time... (Score:5, Insightful)
you have to ask, why now? MS has been in business for such a long time (in software industry terms). MS has never been known to hand out payola. why now?
MS has nothing else to keep the mindshare. OSS is creeping up outside the realm of just the geeks. MS has nothing effective to fend it off. except hoards of cash.
without the payola, the stock would start on a slippery slide downwards all the while losing mindshare. and remember, mindshare among geeks is what got MS to where it is in the first place.
all this just to buy time, literally, until longhorn ships.
if there is any 'after burner' somewhere in the FOSS community, the time is now to kick it in. to win over mindshare before longhorn. because from now until longhorn, MS has nothing but diversionary tactics to keep people interested in MS.
and to all MS fanboys out there, i'm not saying this is a bad thing. it's a great thing. i'm just making a guess as to why they are doing it now.
Re:buying time... (Score:2)
Re:buying time... (Score:3, Interesting)
We just want to get enough market share that they can't push us around with polluted file formats and comm protocols. For that matter, we need enough share that buying politicians and filing frivolous patent suits would be a bad idea. SCO is a trial balloon as much as anything. Hopefully, they're getting the hint. As flaky as ESR is, his
Re:buying time... (Score:2)
yes it does. The roman empire. it fell. is gone. buried beneath ten layers of dirt. why? narcissism. plain and simple. while i don't think MS is detrimentally narcissistic, it certainly is arrogant. but that's besides the point.
now, nowhere did i say MS was going to disappear. so calling me stupid over something i never said was uncalled for.
what i did say is that MS is starting to have to fight for *keeping* it's mindshare because they've got nothing else until l
somebody needs to read his software license (Score:3, Informative)
From the Guardian article:
Oh, and while we are at it I want a tiny payment for myself for having to pay for a second suite of Office for my own (non-Microsoft) computer even though I already had it installed on my office laptop. Or at least count it as an offset against all those statistics about counterfeit downloads.
Maybe he should have actually read his software license, because if Office is installed on a business system, one copy is allowed to be installed on a home system for the purposes of allowing that employee to work on Office documents at home.
Just goes to show you how incredibly ignorant some technology reporters are. Oh, and he could have downloaded StarOffice or OpenOffice...
Re:somebody needs to read his software license (Score:2)
I would read mine except I don't have one.
Re:somebody needs to read his software license (Score:2)
What's the point of having so much money (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean, it's pretty obvious that you can only spend a finite amount of money in a finite amount of time. Period. And why do people care about the future of business dozens (even hundreds) of hears after they're gone?!?
I've heard of some companies buying water from 3rd world's countries.... they're addressing a problem (as a company) that will arise after each-and-every employee is dead and buried...
I am not saying is wrong (althoug I do believe it is), but I just don't get it. Our society is builded upon negating the evidence that we are all gonna die.
So, finally, and to stay on topic, the idea of Microsoft giving back some of it's money, should not be as crazy as it sounds right now...
--krahd
Re:What's the point of having so much money (Score:2)
2. People pay millions for knock-off versions of immortality. Remember the pyramids?
3. People aren't perfectly tuned. They aproximate rationality, but don't reach it. They often over-indulge impulses that would be rational if they weren't so extreme.
4. Plain old enjoyment. Why do artists paint, even if they could make more money and buy things they need if they did somthing else? Why do people play games instead of working? Because they enjoy it. Many people who win the lottery keep
Re:What's the point of having so much money (Score:2)
I would estimate that the Emperor knows that the empire is crumbling and the buy-back is just a scam to pay out cash to insiders before the big fall, including to himself. The same is true of the SCO buy-back program.
Re:What's the point of having so much money (Score:2)
But in a larger sense, the quarterly results fixation has an especially bad outcome: companies ti
Re:that's what makes us humans.... (Score:2)
That's not 'human' that's only 'social'.
Hire more Engineers (Score:2)
A confusing word (Score:3, Interesting)
'Deadline' an Alan Smithee Film (Score:4, Funny)
Must have idea...
Must get editorial in on time...
Politics are done...
Not much happening in the literature scene...
Chomksy stuff is too complicated...
Must be controversial...but not too controversial to the prime demographic...
Whoa...I've got it!!!
[writer bites tongue and begins scribbling onto a ruled notebook, we see the title:]
"The Software Industry is Dead!"
[writer scribbles madly for 90 minutes, has a lot of rough red wine during the scribbling, and then falls asleep on the draft (and dreams of Hemingway).
Out of good options, more like it. (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps a comparison between the bonzai and the ancient jungle. Rigid nano control versus emergent niches. A good bonzai master does not pretend to go against the nature of tree, however. It could be argued that MS is too big to be good.
Personally, I think they should take their cash, set up a good dozen isolated coder communes and evolve a new direction for themselves, one that doesn't involve tieing up the legal system, blanket enforcement and predation. They have enough to change the rules, to shatter the 'office supply' mentality. Without a drastic shift, they're screwed (well as screwed as a giant monopoly can be). They've missed the beauty that is open source, and, as it lies, seem doomed to be tied to a life of fostering servitude. Like moss looking up at the flowering canopy.
Ah I get it (Score:3, Insightful)
I feel sorry for all those people building systems to run peoples businesses, the new phone networks, Air traffic control, software to let people access and work with their data in new and exciting ways, computer games...
All wasting their time - all the software industry needed to do was let microsoft do its thing.
Broadening of the marketplace (Score:5, Insightful)
(Hint: I'm one of those listening programmers - I'd like to think I'm bright)
Don't look at software in terms of "an industry" or as "a product". Look at it as a means to solve problems, and then work out terms where by solving problems, you get paid.
Software isn't the point anymore. The solution to the problem is the point. Look at IBM and their services department. They don't care about the software - why else would they deprecate their zillions of dollars invested in AIX and go with free Linux?
They sell services, and software is just the means. Why not use a community supported, free product?
In an immature market, having the product matters. Specs like N Mhz and M superBytes are important. In a mature market, the solution to X problem matters. Who gives a rat's ass about Mhz or superBytes?
So quit with the "software is manufactured" model of the 1980s and get on with the "software is a means to solve a problem" model of the 21st century! There's plenty of money to be made, you just have to tilt your head 45 degrees and look for the problems waiting to be solved!
Re:Broadening of the marketplace (Score:2)
Old old old marketing boy.
Software is like plumbing (Score:2)
even $60b can't buy much innovation (Score:4, Interesting)
It also requires that a society frees its creative members from having to worry about whether they are going to have a job in six months--someone can't afford to spend time thinking about something that may become a big thing in 10 years if they need to help their company survive this year, every year. And, despite Microsoft's cash position, they are not a company that you can count on being secure in the long run: companies like Microsoft can fumble and face hard times.
The best thing Microsoft has done for innovation has probably been to create a few thousand people that made enough money to leave the company and pursue their own interests without having to worry about money. But that number is far too small to make a big difference to innovation overall: innovation and breakthroughs are rare events, even among a population that is perhaps smarter than average.
Kudos to Microsoft (Score:3, Interesting)
Monopolies (Score:4, Insightful)
The current software situation is just the logical consequence of the actual monopolized industry state.
Without real competence there's no way to create new profit areas. If a small firm finds a niche it will be desplaced as his size reaches a critical magnitude. Big corporations doesn't need to innovate, in fact 'innovation' is only a marketing buzzword.
Now, the point is: Software industry is being frozen by big money corporations, but software is still a hand made creation.
There's no way to stop people writing software, the only real possibility to limit people willingness to write software is to try to convert the process in a very difficult and technical one (ie: raising the entry level). The process is a well know one, and has been done in every mass production industry (electronics, mechanics, etc). That's why we see so much complex and difficult 'standards' (ie: SOAP, CLR) being actively pushed by big corporations.
But no matter how hard they try, software is different from others fields, the complexity factor of software is far greater, that's why small teams and even individuals are able to create great software pieces (very much like music), that's something corporations cannot fight, and that's why things keeps changing in this field.
Some corporations see OSS as a threat, but that's only the logical effect of the nature of software creation in a connected world, the real threat is simpler than that, the real threat is that software is writing.
No future (Score:3, Insightful)
Given the amount of such bogus patents floating around I doubt that it is possible to write any software longer than 1000 lines of code without infringeing on at least one existing patents.
Now I'm just waiting for sombody to file a patent on the procedure of filing bogus patents and licence them at slightly lower cost than it would cost to contest them in court.
Microsoft's Contractors... (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft's Contractors... (Score:2)
Is there something I'm missing here? (Score:2)
Where is the connection?
Since the future is in open source software and its pretty much proving to be unbeatable or unbuyable by such proprietary companies as MS....then what does it matter what the future has beens, are doing today?
The only thing I see here are probably MS employees crying about where or what MS should spend the money on,
What about the next Killer App? (Score:2, Interesting)
For years, we've had better and faster hardware for cheaper prices, but in the last five or seven years, it seems to me (and this is no original thought) that there have been no real exciting new applications that make use of this new hardware.
Sure, there are games. Sure, there's exotic multimedia stuff like video editing.
But where is the new so
Whose IT? (Score:2)
Maybe Microsoft's software industry is "maturing" into stagnation - centrally planned economies always have. But the rest of us, innovating around the edges, aren't held back by the deep limits of "One Microsoft Way".
Re:Well, here's a thought. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Well, here's a thought. (Score:2)
How much of that $3 billion will ever actually be given out by said Foundation?
Go here [forbes.com] and learn something.
Or here [dslreports.com] for more analysis.
Re:Well, here's a thought. (Score:2)
the Gates Foundation held only $728 million of stocks, a mere 3% of its $21.6 billion in net assets (emphasis mine)
The forbes article implies absolutely no wrong-doing. So now I've learned that they have "an investment valued at $226 million (in) Cox Communications" and that the author of the forbes article believes their total stoc
old trick in the book (Score:2)
Re:Well, here's a thought. (Score:2)
Yeah, no shit. The Forbes article implies that they should have more money in stocks, not less.
Re:ohh! Darth Vader gets a heart transplant? (Score:2, Informative)
I'd _love_ $3 billion dollars for my user's work (Score:2, Insightful)
Cry me a fucking river. He made his money due to an inbalanced copyright law; which asserts that value is provided by the author, and discredits value provided by the users of the software. Untill he fixes the menice he has forced upon the world by denouncing over-powerful copyright, he is an evil man.
Re:I'd _love_ $3 billion dollars for my user's wor (Score:2)
Re:I'd _love_ $3 billion dollars for my user's wor (Score:2)
All this money that Gates has represents promises from people to do things for Bill Gates or to give things to Bill Gates in the future.
When he gives the money away, he is in effect redirecting that promised effort towards someone else.
Bill Gates could collect on those promises by spending the money on himself, but by giving it away means someone else gets the benefit of those promises.
So
Re:ohh! Darth Vader gets a heart transplant? (Score:2)
See my post elsewhere in this thread for links to Forbes and DSLReports articles.
Re:ohh! Darth Vader gets a heart transplant? (Score:2)
7.15.2004
Research Consortium Receives $44.7 Million Gates Foundation Grant to Evaluate New Strategies to Fight HIV-Related Tuberculosis
Amazing!
Re:ohh! Darth Vader gets a heart transplant? (Score:2)
Birthright? His father was a laywer and the family were decidedly middle class. It's not like his parents were software barons from the 1960's who handed down the software business to their son as a graduation present or something. Gates (almost) started with nothing and worked his own ass to where he is now. Whether that involved illegal methods or not is immaterial to whether he got it by 'birthright', as he didn't.
This started around the time of the tax cut (Score:5, Interesting)
MS went for years without paying any dividend, because stockholders were able to get their returns in price appreciation. Now, expect flatter pricing, with more dividends. That's good news for stockholders, but bad news for stock option holders.
I'd agree (Score:5, Informative)
Many firms have poision pills and other defensive postures against this aggressive practice, but I've always been surprised no one has tried to buy and dismantle M$. I was also surprised they never paid a dividend, as its a psychological move for investors. Then again, most people aren't buying M$ for a diversified, low-risk retirement portfoilo.
Coming around to the specific topic of timing, it certainly makes sense that the tax code is encouraging it. If you're netting over 7% leaving it alone, why pull out retained earnings to have a cut taken out of it? When I saw they had cash doing nothing (ok...mortgage backed securities) and were keeping ahead of the risk-free rate (rate of a 10 year bond), it's a no brainer to leave it in Microsoft's bank account. I'd almost say you're better off telling them to dividend re-invest. You avoid the taxable income, increase your holdings, and benefit more from the impending stock buy back.
I really hate M$ for its predatory marketing practices and $hitty products, but from an investing standpoint it's hard to hate them.
Re:I'd agree (Score:2)
and i'm now broke. go figure.
Re:yea, but MS could have put (Score:2)
Re:nice insight (Score:2)
Trickle-down theory is about as voodoo as casting cure 2 or whatever on it. Even with all these economy-enriching tax cuts to the upper crust, take-home pay is at its lowest percentage of the economy since 1939 [nytimes.com].
Trickle-down works. To make the rich richer.
Re:nice insight (Score:2)
You must listen to a lot of right-wing talk radio. Explain to me how this money is "being taxed twice". By the "logic" that right-wingers u
Re:nice insight (Score:2)
I see no reason why a dollar earned from going to work at your job as a software engineer, WalMart greeter or jizz mopper at the Lusty Lady should be taxed at a different rate than a dollar earned from interest income, dividends or capi
Re:nice insight (Score:2)
As far as having different tax rates, you're right! Let's have a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage! No matter what the income is you pay the exact same percentage on it. Although, in reality, the jizz mopper should get a tax cut. Man what a horrible job.
Yeah, but he gets all of the change that fell on the floor, that could be pretty significant!
Re:Millionaire Next Door? Yeah right. (Score:2)
The advantage is not having to work at walmart for 20 years from age 60 to 80.
And they don't live
Re:nice insight (Score:2)
Re:AI self programming (Score:2, Funny)
Eliza: Why do you mention computers?
You: What if we just dictate to a computer and it programs and maintains itself automatically.?
Eliza: Why do you mention computers?
You: Eventually, it forms its own nature form of complexity far beyond human management.
Eliza: Please go on.
You: I guess at that point, we just "program" a computer through talking and exchanging ideas rather then sort throu
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Re:What future? (Score:2)
Your definetly correct in that one...also, our Chics are as hot as our chics. What a great place to live on here!
Re:What future? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I Told You Before, Morons (Score:2)
Secondly, if MS wants the PR move from Hell, they should dump their billions into a manned Mars program. Either the "Mars Direct" thing (estimated to be 10s of billions) or another JV with NASA/ESA.
Re:I Told You Before, Morons (Score:2, Insightful)
As you said, "The CORRECT thing to do would be to spend that $50 billion (or at least as much of it as could be controlled - $50 billion is a LOT of money to control) on significant R