It seems to come down to the inescapable fact that if you sell your code, it will be stolen and/or passed along to others. On the other hand, if you simpy put a paywall in front of your code and charge people for a subscription, you can avoid getting financially ass-raped by all of the cheap bastards out there.
I think it's more fundamental than that. Software is non-physical so it is hard to understand paying for it.
Software as a Service ties the utility of the software to the physical machine since to get the utility of the software you must effectively rent the machine's time. This should be several orders of magnitude cheaper than buying machines and using them for short specific tasks for the vast majority of situations.
So this re-unification of the code's utility and machine use should be much easier for people to grasp and should ultimately yield business models that make more sense. I expect the change will push most software developers in one of two directions... small custom in-house (web|platform) applications versus large "Cloud Computing" applications.
Time will tell if I'm right. I've chosen to try and position myself on the side of large SaaS applications with small light clients. It makes more sense for everyone since the value of the code and the machines are implicitly tied together. Much easier for people to understand and understand why they need to cough up money for the software.
If I could have cars for $0, I'd have 50 cars in my driveway, one for every occasion. But that says nothing about how many cars I'd be willing to buy for $10000.
I would have at most 2 cars if I could have any car for $0. I don't like cars. I would get rid of one car if I got a 3rd car for some reason. I don't like having cars around.
I recently paid for an app where the developer had created a "pay what you like" system. He had a toggle for the price. $0.99, $1.99, $2.99... up to $5.99 IIRC. I chose to pay $2.99 because I had used the demo version for a week and liked his work.
After paying an email arrived with an unlock code and I unlocked the application from demo mode. I quite liked the experience. If I ever do an Android application I think I'd like the pricing to work that way.
I just keep hearing how "evil" Google is becoming... but they do stuff like this when nobody else seems to. These types of projects are the kinds of things an idealistic socialist government would do... yet here's a capitalist organisation doing them.
'if online shopping replaces 3.5 traditional shopping trips, or if 25 orders are delivered at the same time, or, if the distance traveled to where the purchase is made is more than 50 kilometers.
The way my wife shops I think we completely exceed at least two of those criteria on each trip.
We commonly travel round-trip around 30 miles shopping.
We typically visit at least three stores approximately 5 miles apart before large purchases often cycling back to the first store before buying.
When we *do* buy online we typically save up a large number of purchases to the same online retailer before buying even with free shipping
Ironically, the "Shop Savvy" Android app means we now head out find an item, find it cheaper online then put it in a "buy queue" for later meaning we still drove but didn't buy.
I've had the same experience. It is far more valuable to exercise, eat right, go to sleep on time, etc. You spend less time creating WTF in your code. The net effect is a single delivery may take longer but the whole system has lower WTF count and thusly comes together faster, better, stronger.
"Programming requires long nights staring blankly at mind-muddling objective languages."
Actually, no, it doesn't. I have never done this and never will. And yet I'm gainfully imployed as a programmer and my bosses (including the owners of the company) constantly tell me they value my contributions to the company.
Okay. I'm doing something wrong. Where the hell do you work and how can I get a job there?
Slashdot Mirror
I've been on slashdot longer... and I'd like to say: You kids get off my lawn!
It seems to come down to the inescapable fact that if you sell your code, it will be stolen and/or passed along to others. On the other hand, if you simpy put a paywall in front of your code and charge people for a subscription, you can avoid getting financially ass-raped by all of the cheap bastards out there.
I think it's more fundamental than that. Software is non-physical so it is hard to understand paying for it.
Software as a Service ties the utility of the software to the physical machine since to get the utility of the software you must effectively rent the machine's time. This should be several orders of magnitude cheaper than buying machines and using them for short specific tasks for the vast majority of situations.
So this re-unification of the code's utility and machine use should be much easier for people to grasp and should ultimately yield business models that make more sense. I expect the change will push most software developers in one of two directions... small custom in-house (web|platform) applications versus large "Cloud Computing" applications.
Time will tell if I'm right. I've chosen to try and position myself on the side of large SaaS applications with small light clients. It makes more sense for everyone since the value of the code and the machines are implicitly tied together. Much easier for people to understand and understand why they need to cough up money for the software.
If I could have cars for $0, I'd have 50 cars in my driveway, one for every occasion. But that says nothing about how many cars I'd be willing to buy for $10000.
I would have at most 2 cars if I could have any car for $0. I don't like cars. I would get rid of one car if I got a 3rd car for some reason. I don't like having cars around.
I recently paid for an app where the developer had created a "pay what you like" system. He had a toggle for the price. $0.99, $1.99, $2.99 ... up to $5.99 IIRC. I chose to pay $2.99 because I had used the demo version for a week and liked his work.
After paying an email arrived with an unlock code and I unlocked the application from demo mode. I quite liked the experience. If I ever do an Android application I think I'd like the pricing to work that way.
Oh I get it. The target market for this product is mob-bosses.
Now I'm confused. Confused and hungry.
Go eat some bacon and calm down.
You trade your cash for gold at these ... then you go to Cash4Gold and trade the gold for cash?
Will they dispense other kinds of bullion other than 35?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullion#Bullion
Gold bullion would be coins made of gold. Therefor, 35 bullion machines would be 35 machines that dispense coins minted from precious metals.
Why don't we ever hear about any of these?
So... why doesn't Microsoft do this?
I just keep hearing how "evil" Google is becoming... but they do stuff like this when nobody else seems to. These types of projects are the kinds of things an idealistic socialist government would do... yet here's a capitalist organisation doing them.
Does Apple or Microsoft do stuff like this? How about Oracle? If they don't why not?
am glad that thing is extinct.
'if online shopping replaces 3.5 traditional shopping trips, or if 25 orders are delivered at the same time, or, if the distance traveled to where the purchase is made is more than 50 kilometers.
The way my wife shops I think we completely exceed at least two of those criteria on each trip.
Ironically, the "Shop Savvy" Android app means we now head out find an item, find it cheaper online then put it in a "buy queue" for later meaning we still drove but didn't buy.
I shall reconsider our shopping habits.
This is why we need trench digging and maintaining nano-bots.
... but you don't see me complaining here on /. do you?
Interesting point. There might be such a thing as too small and too thin. Hard to believe we've already gotten there.
There's something to be said for just going home, getting some sleep, and taking a fresh look in the morning.
And yet this attitude won't get you promoted.
I've had the same experience. It is far more valuable to exercise, eat right, go to sleep on time, etc. You spend less time creating WTF in your code. The net effect is a single delivery may take longer but the whole system has lower WTF count and thusly comes together faster, better, stronger.
"Programming requires long nights staring blankly at mind-muddling objective languages."
Actually, no, it doesn't. I have never done this and never will. And yet I'm gainfully imployed as a programmer and my bosses (including the owners of the company) constantly tell me they value my contributions to the company.
Okay. I'm doing something wrong. Where the hell do you work and how can I get a job there?
Don't bother me with details. I have an inciteful story to not read and make wild assumptions about!
Exactly. I would have said "insightful" otherwise. Slashdot often rewards inciteful over insightful.
Don't take it personally, you posted AC so I was having fun. I rarely let loose like that. It was cathartic.
Again, I ask why? I just don't follow your logic.
My logic is this:
As I said, "I don't know who wrote TrueType" but I was under the impressions that:
This all is predicated on the idea that people wish their work to be:
Granted this argument does not hold if people do not value their work, care if it is used, or care if it is thrown away.
Based on your lack of understanding I presume one of the following is true about you:
While you may not follow my logic I follow yours perfectly. This indicates that either
I can accept either outcome.
+1 inciteful
I never said "no ethical person should work there" however I was dumb enough to reply to an AC.