Slashdot Mirror
Landscape Is Changing For Microsoft and Google
ReadWriteWeb writes "John Milan, Senior Software Architect and founder of TeamDirection, writes about the convergence of Web and Desktop. He argues that Microsoft and Google are focusing so much on each other, that both will either fail to notice the landscape is changing underfoot — or will be unable to adapt quickly enough. The article concludes that the days of purely desktop-based applications are clearly numbered, but so are the days of exclusively web-based apps. Both Microsoft and Google are racing toward a happy medium. However, they aren't the only players in town, not by a long shot. Both Mozilla and Adobe are well positioned to take advantage of desktop and web convergence."
1. Bandwidth; until ultra high speed internet connections are available everywhere, it will hinder innovation. Corporations can afford these lines DS3/OC3+++ but the average home user still has a crappy dsl connection or dial-up god forbid. Not exactly enough to run soley on web based content. Could you imagine Windows going even slower if it was Web Based?
2. Reliability; Using all web apps or a web based OS would be ridiculous. What happens when your DS3 circuit goes down at your company? Yeah sure we already rely on the internet for job related things and internet downtime does kill productivity, but it doesn't render your computer useless, you can still write code, do accounting stuff or whatever it is that you do.
In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
Microsoft is a very reactive company; when the landscape changes, they will eventually adapt, though it may take years. Google, however, is setting the pace in many ways, and has a boggling number of development efforts in the works that are still ahead of most other companies. So I disagree these two companies are somehow in the same predicament.
Anyway, from the article: "The days of purely desktop-based applications are clearly numbered, but so are the days of exclusively web-based apps. Both Microsoft and Google are racing toward a happy medium. However, they aren't the only players in town, not by a long shot. Both Mozilla and Adobe are well positioned to take advantage of desktop and web convergence. Companies offering solutions that connect desktop and web apps together will get their chance too. Calendaring and project management are two obvious choices, but every productivity app deserves to be re-examined."
The author also says "in the spirit of open source I'm happy to dispense my advice freely...." Continuing that spirit, I'm happy to modify your advice so it actually works. Adobe will never go up against Microsoft, Google or others in developing their own "web convergence" applications (word processors, calendars, whatever). Adobe is in the business of enabling communication. If that means in print, they've got it (InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop, etc.). If it means in portable documents, they've got it (PDF, now FlashPaper too). If it means web development, they've got it (Flash, Dreamweaver, GoLive, Flex, Cold Fusion, etc.). Adobe makes tools for designers and builders; they don't make the end product. The author of the article has missed this point.
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
1995 called, they want their Netscape back.
I'm sure we all know that we really want to play Quake inside a browser. No, the Desktop OS will never go away and browsers are not the best tool for every job, any more than screwdrivers have made hammers obsolete. I can't really say any use in a program that's half web based and half desktop based. Except perhaps to use a browser component to access web pages from within the application. Any other information can be handled by a proprietary networking app/server and you get orders of magnitude better performance.
To make a bad analogy it's like saying in the future everyone will drive a van because most furniture will fit in it. It's a waste of resources for those who don't need that extra storage space.
After reading the article, I'm left uninpressed.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
There is an old saying in Germany: Ist der Handel noch so klein, bringt er mehr als Arbeit ein (May the trade be small, it still yields more than work). You may look at any economy you want: the people who make a living by bashing on matter are always outnumbered by people moving things or agree to each other how to let other people move things.
Even if you look into a mine: There are much more people moving ore or coal from the deep pit to the surface or from the surface to the processing plant or whatever than people actually mining (e.g. drilling into rock, putting in dynamite etc.pp.)
If you look at Western Europe's largest conglomeration of towns and industry, the Ruhr Area with about six million inhabitants, even the towns with the largest industry sector like Gelsenkirchen, Bochum or Dortmund have only 16% industry workers compared with about 40% workers in the services sector. (Ironically the small towns and villages in the rural regions southeast of the Ruhr Area, in the Sauerland, have 25% of workers in the industry sector).
In the end most of our productivity doesn't come from mending and bending matter, but from moving things in a coordinated way. And that's why moving and coordinating is much better paid than hammering on things.