I think this discussion loses something major. Namely: at what
level is today's software industry with respect to what the world
needs? Where are we with respect to the knee of that curve?
For example. My business is plain text fiction. The knee of the
curve for me, was when I had MicroEmacs running in an msdos
with Mix software's unix utilities added; a good text formatter,
and a letter quality dot matrix printer. Nothing that has evolved
since, has improved utility and my productivity. I have in fact,
lost substantial time and effort trying to use this new stuff.
That is how my personal experience leads me to question the
forecasts of doom & gloom, and other economic issues around
the software industries. When someone recasts this talk in
ways that bring in the need vs utility curve and its knee, then I'll
be interested with what's said about this topic.
Cheers -- Martha Adams [cola 2007 May 15]
"[H]omer" <spam@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3c2qh4-c3n.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>
>> 'The big three all have so-called "on-demand" strategies underway for
>> obvious
>> reasons. New license revenue has stalled. Making matters worse, open
>> source
>> companies dish out new, good enough software for low-end tasks at a
>> steady
>> pace. This leaves services and maintenance programs as the only real
>> ways to
>> make new money.'
>>
>> Can you blame Microsoft for becoming a bully? They struggle for
>> survival as
>> they fail to evolve and address a new /type/ of competition...
>> software that
>> is better and cheaper, based on other (and new) economic models. It's
>> not
>> about people making software that is just free (of charge) and
>> destoring the
>> economy but about people making software that respects their freedom,
>> rights, and liberties. The customer is in charge, not the vendor.
>
> There's definitely a hard push away from proprietary licensing and
> towards services right now. That represents two problems for
> Microsoft.
> First their entire operation is currently dependant on the proprietary
> licensing model, and second they've proved themselves utterly
> incompetent in the services sector.
>
> Oh dear.
>
> --
> K.
> http://slated.org
>
> .----
> | 'Also, no one calls it PCI-X even though that's the "official "
> | shortening of the much more commonly used "PCI Express".'
> | - Hardon Quirk, COLA's resident "genius".
> `----
>
> Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel
> 2.6.20-1.2312.fc5
> 02:10:48 up 28 days, 23:42, 2 users, load average: 0.19, 0.09, 0.11
|
|
