Slashdot Mirror
The Future of the Software Industry
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.
...that MS has all this money and yet such poor quality software. I'm not just trying to bash them, but billions of cash in reserve and yet their software is repeatedly delayed and then still buggy and full of security holes.
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 industry for everyone.
I don't think that what software is turning into a commodity. It think what is happening is that it is getting very hard to charge premium prices for software that implements old solutions. My customers (mostly) don't care about programming languages, OSes, or database managers. But they sure have to pay for them.
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.
I think that the software industry has much, much more room to mature. The current bottleneck, IMHO, is the state of consumer-grade computing hardware. While huge strides are being made almost daily, hardware still can only handle what it will handle.
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 specs for Longhorn.
Once the capability of hardware once again surpasses that of the mainstream generic software, we will once again see a lot of room for growth in the software industry.
bash: rtfm: command not found
This akin to the age of enlightenment, but we aren't quite there yet. No one knows the future of IT and software. We live in interesting times. The next 5-20 years will be....interesting.
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.
One thing that's been increasingly bothering and intriguing me, as I get older and older (I'm 27, I'm getting middle-aged!) is what is the fscking point of having loads and loads of money (á là Mr. Gates), if you are going to die nevertheless...
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
mod me up scottie!
$3 billino dollars == an infinite amount of money more than the average american.
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.
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.
so, he's only keeping $3 Billion dollars... well, that makes me feel alot better.... NOT
Facts are, he earned his cash through overly powerful copyright law, and through the abuse of 100's of smaller tech firms like the one I was involved in (1991) through pointless litigation to keep competitors down and out of sight. He's a sick puppy. And his "oh, I only want three billion" doesn't make me think "wow! what a noble man". if he only wanted a few million, say enough to give himself 200K income per year for the rest of his life, I'd happly declare him our savior and lord. But EXCUSE me for raining on your parade. He's an ugly mean person who took advantage of his birthright. What an ass.
All the software that was ever needed was a word processor, outlook, excel and powerpoint - a few other bits and pieces.
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.
The software industry is maturing. It's also broadening. There are zillions of little niche markets well served by a bright high-level language programmer who's willing to listen.
(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!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
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.
What's in a sig?
really, since your temper tantrum seems to be out of control, I will only make four points, one actually supports you in your ramblings(I think your version of lessons in economics to the general community, which I am sure you have studied in such incredible depth that you might be on the verge of a nobel prize break through).
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&D. This would improve MS's chances of being even more profitable in the future, and thus an even better stock pick."
well, I think you should be informed, the spend billions every year on R&D, it just happnes that they make quite a bit more. As you said, 50 billion is a lot, but so is 10 billion, and its really hard to find a use for almost 37 billion dollars you pull in every year. There profit in one year is closer to 9 billion. There are few companies that boast these kinds of numbers. IBM sees profit like this but also sees over 20 billion dollars in debt, that at least gives you something to do with your money if you ever want to. Further, IBM does more than just software, a lot more, so they have many more routes to pursue. This is in no way a lesson in economics, just pointing out that for a purely software company, it might be difficult to spend this kind of money.
I personally think this money is being used wisely. In the end, it is the investor's money and successful companies should award shareholders with dividends. Most major companies do, it makes them true long term investments. I think Microsoft is admitting that it can't continue to expand its software industry at the amazing pace they did for nearly 20 years. One of many stocks I hold is microsoft and I'll be glad to see this dividend. I won't comment on the stock buyback because there are many reasons a company would engage in this but from what I have read, it usually means "hey, we don't need the investors as much and hey, are stock is lagging, lets take back some of those shares and make our company more independent again).
You also grace us with the genius comment
"And all it cost them was giving away the company's R&D (and/or acquisition) nest egg.
Which cost them nothing because they have NO FUCKING CLUE how to spend it on R&D ANYWAY!
"
well, I'll give you one example of what they are losing, interesting on all that money and yes, interest, even today, can be worth a lot. Frankly, if they are following econ 101, they don't invest it in R&D because the returns on those investments is below the return of interest yielding investments. Yes, this is an economics lesson because it should be considered as it always is by major companies before investing in something.
3. "Also, if you give away a big stock benefit, what happens? Morons buy your stock hoping it will happen again. This keeps your stock price up.
"
I hope no one, including you, would think a divident announced as a One time deal, and one that will eat through most of a companies cash, is likely to happen a second time. More likely, is people will buy the stock over the next 3 years of this happening to cash in on this dividend and the natural run up of a stock price during a buy back. and yes, this is a great way to buy time until Longhorn and Office whatever comes out.
4. "And they can't buy anybody because everybody else would rather die than work for Microsoft!
"
Please, some form of proof before writing bull shit about a company. Every time I speak to my family in india, they see it as an amazing employment opportunity for young people to work for Microsoft and several other countries. Now if you are talking about solely developers, I have no idea but you have given me nothing to go by.
Now I will actually attempt to address some points made in the article which I personally think over exagerates the situation slightly. I think Microsoft represents a sm
Don't get too comfy - Indian companies are already losing business to ones in China and the Phillipines. You can't build a long term economy on simply being the cheapest - there are always people willing to work for less.
If software patents, gets granted like they are in the US today, where every simple and obvious idea seam to be granted usually overly broad patent regardless how much prior art there is, the future of the software industry belongs to the lawyers.
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.
God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
The future of the American software industry is in Mumbai, Maharashtra State, in India.
Negative.
I live in the midwest, and here's the deal: Fortune 500 and smaller companies are insourcing projects left and right. The reason? You suck. Seriously.
Generally speaking the perception was that "all Indian engineers are geniuses," which is of course horse shit. It seems like those of you that made it up to North America were the best of the best. Generally major computing companies gave tests at your more prestiguous universities and managed to scalp the top five percent using the H1B. A flood of Indian engineers ended up in the states, and damned if they weren't all sharper than a tack.
Reality check: take the top five percent of our grads from our top drawer universities (or European universities if you prefer), and you'll find that Indian scientist and engineers handily get their asses handed to them. In addition, if we need real expertise, THE people to beat are the eastern Europeans. These people generally own you (and us) with respect to algorithmic expertise and balls to the walls mathematics.
Personally I think it is lame that with over a billion people India's number of so-called expert engineers and scientsts is so low. Oh my, could it be because 2/3 of your people are still dirt poor? Seems like they want a piece of the pie too, and your middle class hasn't been paying up. Nice election you had last time.. heheh.
With remote project management costs, lame engineers in India, and general outsourcing backlash coupled with your latest round of elections, you'll be back to the stone age in no time.