Slashdot Mirror
IT Growth: Exponential No More
BreadMan writes "The Economist has has an article about growth in the IT industry coming off a period of unsustainable growth. Compares IT to growth industries of the past like railroads and automobiles."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
The Economist published the same thing during the peak of the boom (late 90's) saying it was going to end and had a chart of overlaping curve of railroad automobile blah.
The chart was of the derivitaves of total size (a chart of growth) so they looked like bell curves, or maybe upside down purabalas<sp> and not S's but I have a distinct memory because it was at that moment I realized that if I took CS in college I would be getting out just as the job market was impossible (this year).
Not that I wanted to go to college anyway.
I guess it just shows that the use of the past in economics is very effective for predicting the future (better then the weather anyway).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
The article talks about IT in terms of HARDWARE - Moore's Law - i.e. the doubling of processor speed every two years.
A neat graph shows the typical lifecycle of any technology from 'irruption' (sic) through to 'maturity', closely followed by the 'next great surge'
LINUX - THE NEXT GREAT SURGE !
$ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
@(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
I don't think it matters, because from my experiance the average person doesn't know what it means either and just thinks it means "big" or "fast".
Yes it's annoying that our society caters to the lowest common denominator.
Building a better backup.
Zettabyte Storage
What bothers me is that they assume that "IT" is one technology. In fact it is several, and I'd assume that most of them have not been discovered. It's not that long ago when Internet wasn't in the radar of The Economist reporters...
Yes it's back to slide rule for you. Computers just didn't work out, so now we're just going to give up on them entierly.
Whatever, the world will continue to cram computers into more and more random devices and network them all together. Can your tivo talk to your cell phone? It should, and I'm sure one day it will. And all along the way there will be companies doing such things, making a lot of money in the process.
So don't give up on the IT market just because you can no longer find a job as a Novell admin anymore.
Chin up slashdoters.
-makoffee
I can not count the times I've talked to people who have either lost jobs or cannot find jobs in the "tech feild" only to find out they (a)have no certs or (b)have to skill to obtain certs.
As an employer, skill set is more important to me than a certification. Then again, when I hire, the prospective employee is required to take, and pass, a practical exam. I've seen my share of paper MCSE's out there.
Oh well. I've been saying it for years... the tech boom and crash happened because the people with money didn't know squat about computer systems. They gave the guy who sounded like they knew more the bucks. Hot air eventually cools off. And when it does...
Sure, explosive growth isn't going to continue in any industry that has reached relative maturity. It's far from doom and gloom, however, and the article doesn't discuss one of the most important effects of IT buildups.
While there's no question much of the economy's boom was based on hype, there are still real, bottom line reasons for strength -- and numero uno, IMHO, is the strong growth in productivity. IT-related expenditures get a lot of credit for this growth.
Railroads and automobiles aren't fair comparisons, because they are essentially 'fixed-function.' Once you can ship things anywhere inexpensively, what else will drive railroad growth? "A little faster" isn't a fundamental change. Unlike these examples, IT infrastructure is constantly evolving, adding new ways to increase productivity.
For example, "B2B" exchanges are no longer flashy, but still growing like crazy and boosting efficiency. There are many other applications with strong potential but currently limited real-world usage, such as e-learning, knowledge management, and video conferencing -- and plenty more great ideas still being dreamed up.
The IT industry is still growing. It's just growing in third-world countries, so greedy CEO's who are already obscenely compensated can pocket even more by using sweat-shop labor. (Think textiles and the garment industry - nothing new.)
When was the last time Microsoft released a new version of Internet Explorer? I believe it was back before they had 90% or more market share. Hmm. What a coinicidence.
When was the last time that Microsoft significantly improved their desktop OS? That would be Windows 95. Back when Microsoft was facing competition from OS/2 for that business.
When was the last time that Microsoft significantly improved their server OS? Well, you can debate that one, but it's obvious that Microsoft even today faces stiff competition from Linux, BSD, and other Unix variants.
And speaking of lack of competition, we all know the real reason why fiber to the home (the last mile) is taking so long: local telephone monopolies. This is true in the USA and in other countries. Once people can get fiber to the home, the so-called "bandwidth glut" will disappear in a hurry.
There is a lot more innovation that can take place. The biggest area IMO is wireless. The small, handheld wireless device market is certainly not mature. One of the things to look for is cell phone/PDA convergence, which hasn't been done sufficiently well yet. It's not just all-in-one devices, however. We should also look for new functionality in devices.
Content distribution is still the toughest business. Unless you have a world-class product like the Wall Street Journal, it's difficult to charge money for information. The best solution is to sell not just information, but add on something else. This something else could be a service like ad-blocking or a set number of minutes of professional advice or consulting, or a tangible product like a poster or a toy. Don't just sell Harry Potter on the web. Sell a bundle of a Harry Potter book together with a unique poster or action figure. That sort of thing.
In short, the future is very bright. Microsoft's monopoly will not last forever, even if the US government refuses to do anything about it.
Shouldn't this have been news about 2 years ago?
A-Bomb
It really does come down to market economics. As the workplace shrinks, what used to be an employees market becomes an employers market - there are more suitable persons per job. Ergo it is harder to get a job, you have to be better qualified in all sense, and you get paid less.
And there isn't much one can do about. A votre sante and good luck.
You remind me of me back when I was in college. Just mainly wanted to do it because I loved programming. Most of the other people in my class just wanted "easy money." The majority of them did only the minimal amount of programming needed to pass whatever class they were taking at the time. The really sad part is that even thogh you may not be "in-it-for-the-big-bucks" you can bet just about anyone else in the software industry is. In one talk with a former IT manager, he scorned my reasons for being a programmer and was flabergasted that I didn't care about is mult-thousand dollar bonus, he was planning to get upon the projects completion. If you just love to do programming, you really don't need college for it. Looking back on my college days, I feel like I got scammed. Most of what I learned was on my own, between work and classes. The college degree is a costly ticket to IT slavedom, where your day is spent making some jerk at the top rich. My advice to you is work a good-paying day-job and program in your sparetime doing open-source or something that helps your day-job. The ideal setup would be to own your own business and do your own web development and information management.
In this case it may simply be demand outstripping supply. Computers today are really, really fast. The constant pressure to get the latest and best machine is no longer anywhere near as strong as it used to be, since for almost all applications, computers are "fast enough." (The main industry still pushing the envelope is, of course, the gaming industry.)
For the last few years, Intel and the other chip manufacturers have been starting to falter, probably because people are really coming to realize that they don't need the latest and greatest chip to do what they need to do. So the slump may be simply due to economics rather than hitting some kind of technological plateau.
..is that you're foolish to beleive that a job as a programmer or engineer is going to be really hard to find. If you are low skilled, say just a Java programmer or something like that...you know the type, then sure, it may be bleak. But think about all the devices that are out and even more coming out that need EE people to make, programmers to program etc. Perhaps being a network guy or sys-admin is going to be harder to come across but I think the future is going to be even greater for programmers, at least programmers with a good foundation such as a CS degree or by someone who is enthusiastic and self taught.
Think about it, PC's will soon be the smallest market for IT, so if your career is based around writing business apps or PC related software then you may be in trouble. But with so many things going digital, there will be greater demand for people to make these systems, and they will be complex systems.
Although the job market is trash right now for IT, it is trash for just about everything else, except maybe a bankruptcy lawer.
You log onto a site like dice or monster and you see thousands of jobs. The only problem is these jobs demand skill and knowledge. Real knowledge, not the kind that a certifcate from a 5 month program gives you.
I hope I don't come across as a troll, but seriously, most of these certificates A+, MCSE etc are nothing more than going to a factory and reading a really long manual on how to operate a machine. We need people for this of course, but don't expect to be paid well for it anymore as we have found out that anyone can do this if they are willing to put a few months effort into it.
Go back to school right now and learn something real. If not, at least go to the library and read some hard material, the kind that takes a while to learn. These are the types of people needed desperatly right now. People are having a terrible time sifting through the people who can actually solve problems that are defined with the domain of their limited skill set.
I don't know, just some thoughts, but did you really think it was going to last? Eaasy come, easy go goes the saying. I'm convinced if the unemployed IT "professionals" took time off to learn some things, like how a computer really works, they would see the rewards. Then again, nothing is guarenteed and I need as little competition as possible to keep my wallet fat.
We talk about the need for robust software, well become a robust programmer. Don't paint yourself into a corner by putting it all on X technology. Learn the foo and you can adapt to anything.
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
1.) Yes, it is, when you look at percentages of federal taxes, combined with other federally-mandated fees, dues, and witholdings.
2.) Sure they can, but you are also comparing the sale of government-regulated goods instead of market-regulated goods. Take, for example, the sale of TV. With a consumption tax, Company A could just keep their prices high, rather than passing on their tax savings to the consumer, but Company B can now afford to lower the price of their product in order to compete with Company A. As this process continues, the cost of TVs will decline, eventually to the point where the consumption tax has broken even.
3.) It's fair for everyone. Why should a person who earns a higher income pick up the slack for the person who does not? The very idea that a high-income earner should do this is not fair. That aside, with the Fair Tax proposal mentioned in the parent, necessities like food, clothing, shelter, and daycare are all tax exempt. In this respect, someone who earns only enough money to survive is 100% free of any tax burden.
4.) Corporations don't pay taxes. They do on paper, but they don't in reality. Corporations mearly pass their tax burden down the line, by way of marking up prices and paying lower wages. I.e., passing the buck.
5.) Part of the reason that jobs are being located abroad is salaries... A lot of the reason is still taxation, and a good amount is also poor legislation. Labor visas come to mind here... While a Fair-tax like system would not alleviate this problem, it would certainly lessen it.
For the love of god, it's only a week or so since we had an identical thread under a similar name. JUST DEAL WITH THE FACT THAT CLAIMING SOME UNDERSTANDING OF 'NET TECHONOLOGY IS NO LONGER A PATH TO INSTANT RICHES. YOU CAN STILL DO OK IF YOU WORK HARD, BUT THE GOLD RUSH IS OVER, GOT THAT?'. OK, now that's out of my system, can the people who don't really enjoy working late to solve logic puzzles please leave the profession, whilst the rest of us pay our mortgages they way we always planned?
The sky is falling etc.
Guess what, we are in a nasty recession. ALL capital spending is way off. Businesses spend money to increase capacity when growth is strong. No growth, capacity underutilization etc. means no need to increase capacity through either productivity or staff improvements. IT accounts for something like 20-30% of capital investments.
When the economy starts growing again people will start being in short supply (unemployment overall is a relatively low 6% given the severity of the recession) soon. The only way businesses will be able to increase capacity is through capital investment. During all this Moore's law has been chugging along and those new systems will be 10x+ faster (and getting 64bit CPUs in commodity hardware allowing manipulation of massive data sets cheaply) than what the business has been using, and software to take advantage has been getting better too, making upgrades very cost-effective. Businesses have also been amassing mammouth quantities of data in electronic form in the meantime because of their previous investments.
Moore's law doesn't tell the whole story by far. Data storage capacity and network bandwith are increasing at rates far faster than Moore's law. CPUs are relatively mature by comparison, ONLY doubling every two years or so. Hard disk bytes/$ doubles every 9 months, and network bandwidth is tripled every year.
The confluence of trends is obvious, and somebody is going to make a lot of money tying all this together.
The IT good times will roll again soon enough. When it happens you won't be able to outsource to China or India because they will be caught up in it too. Companies who outsourced their IT will find that the new crown jewels of productivity will be beyond their grasp and they will relearn the hard lesson that you DO NOT outsource core business activities if you want to maintain control of your fate.
hmm...I've encountered this before, but I haven't really taken a serious look at it until I read this post. Since you seem to be familiar with the proposal, can you answer a few questions for me?
1) The site repeatedly emphasises that you will now take home 100% of your paycheck - no taxes deducted. How does the split between federal and state taxes work? Are all states now required to take thier income solely from sales tax, and is the percentage they get fixed? Either way, is this an infringement on state's rights?
2) How does this affect retirement/pension plans other than social security? Personally, I don't pay into social security, but I do pay into a state retirement plan which is IMO much better; would this plan force me to switch to social security?
3) According to the website, everything would be taxed at 23% (with a refund for "necessities"). Given that, as a college student on a very limited income, I pay almost no taxes, wouldn't I be voting to have less money if I approved this?
4) Wouldn't this increase the rate at which society fractures into the "haves" and "have-nots", as those earning {m/b}illions would have almost none of it taxed unless they choose to spend?
5) Between the increase in sales tax and the decrease in the taxes corporations pay, what would you expect to be the net change in the price of goods?
6) Why should corporations be exempt from taxes and yet still be given rights as persons? And since businesses aren't taxed, wouldn't than encourage everyone to just incorporate as a business and claim everything is for "business use"?
Twenties Retirement
1. The cost of switching over (and doing away with IPv4) is enormous, and it will be a long time before that cost is less than losses due to overextension of IPv4. Look how long it took us to get away from things that have ZERO cost of switching over, like waiting for people to upgrade from Netscape 4.
3. HDTV is the textbook case of the chicken-and-egg problem. Not only that, there's really no reason to switch over to it. What can you do with HDTV that you can't do with NTSC? I don't mean just increase the quality or watch widescreen movies without pan where is the "killer app" for HDTV? People talk about it as if it was the biggest thing since cable or color, but it's not *that* much better.
In 2010 people will be wondering where the hell IPv6 and HDTV are, just like they have been doing for the past 10 years.
And, in the same vein, with all the digital restrictions management and fair-use prevention technolgies coming down the pike, what won't you be able to do with HDTV that you can do with NTSC?
Don't give up yet.
Although the "electronic bubble" may have burst, dragging with it a lot of the IT-related industries, not all have been lost.
Remember the railway boom and bust cycle ?
Well
Now, with the bust of the electronic bubble, some other thing WILL replace it - perhaps it's the wireless, or perhaps it's wearable stuffs, or whatever, but looking back in human history, something WILL EMERGE right after the crash of something else.
Like waves - one wave will come right after another - human civilization will NEVER LET ANYTHING STANDSTILL - and we'll see what come next.
Perhaps it's a combination of textile and electronics (wearable computing) or textile/electronic/long-range-sensing thingy, or perhaps with some bits of bio-electro-tech thrown in.
I'm sure something else will come up. Those who have visions will make a bundle, as usual. Those who do the "follow-the-leader" may make a smaller bundle.
And so on
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
insist on being able to understand everything after the event? They always are able to find patterns _post facto_. Hey, I can do that too... the fact is that economists have never ever managed to predict anything - their predictions have been worse that those of seismologists.. they rely on naive prediction methods, simplistic 1 or 2-variable theories and childish 'cycles' to explain things. Cycles must exist, since growth is not constant, but they can neither explain them nor predict their duration. Just making fancy curves and putting cool names on the graph proves nothing.
And for those of you that would like to say that The Economist had a similar article during the boom, I have to counter that they have published conflicting articles during the same period. Economists have varying opinions, which are anyway never based on any solid evidence. They are just hunches. I trust my bookmaker more.
I miss my rubber keyboard.(Homepage)
Ummm... Because you don't?
The one thing I am seriously looking forward to is when the industry 'matures' *cough* so that the various used car salesmen and those who think they know what they're doing move on and let those of us who do get on with it...
Anyway... I have to go and install a new graphics card in my file&print server - the old one is just way too slow.