Renting software, subscription based models, etc. will only be of value when that model provides an aspect of the software that could not be accessed on pure client based. For example, a model with all of the standard options but with ability to access new data from a variety of sources for a market or community. This would then provide much more data to work with, solve new problems, new value added.
For me, the managers I worked the best for and enjoyed working with...
One would listen to my ideas, let me do what I want, and generally protected myself and the group from the higher up political infighting. Let us do get our job done, understood that nobody else was going to do but us. He didn't have much experience with the products we were directly working on but did have a lot of managing experience and was fairly intelligent. I would say the fastest way to find out if the person has gone through the ropes and knows what the hell their doing, is finding out about their previous managing experiences, how long was he doing it, how many people, ask what he has learned about it. He also didn't have an incredibily large ego and was more than willing to pass on the credit for good work as much as possible. While this worked great for the group, didn't work so well for him, he got canned after about two years on the job.
This versus another manager I had that while he had a few years managing experience, had an ego that didn't quite match the mush in his head. So, because I kept on wanting to do whatever I thought was best, but since it wasn't his idea, he would always, always, have a problem with it. He had no balls to take on anyone outside the group, always assumed that people outside the group were right and we were wrong, and had absolutely no real understanding of technology, or worse yet, desire to learn about. Took credit for the groups work, rewarded the stupid idiot yes men regardless of any real accomplishments. Well the smart ones soon started leaving, I left within a year, but because he was always looking out for himself and taking all of this credit, got praised by his managers and got some employee award of the year. This didn't last though and I found later he got moved over to one of those small time positions with little responsibility and generally out of the picture.
Now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever had a consistent manager for longer than two years or so. If I were you I would look for qualities that just show experience and at least a strong interest in the technology so at least they will be able to somewhat comprehend what you spend all your time on.
Nothing beats passion to solve a real problem and that is what google is trying to advertise with their bs phd number. Congrats for them, big deal, Broadcom did this for chips a few years ago, where are they now? People with phds are wimps that need a very large security blanket. That being said, it would be very interesting to see what would come from a phd that had to build a business from scratch (no handholding vc funding) and see what happens in five years.
Google thinks that through hiring all these phds + 20% free time will provide an ample amount of passion to make it work. All it needs is one very passionate person running the show, unless of course they plan on a cut and run in a couple years when the competition catches up. Look at Apple, Sun, and Oracle, all companies with a CEO that were founded by and continue to produce cutting edge solutions, without anything close to a phd education.
it's true, the mba's have moved in
on
Why I.T. Matters
·
· Score: 1
and that is the sign of why IT is past. sure, innovation still happens but it still happens in cars too.
it goes like this, the beginning is filled with immense amounts of innovation, nearly everyone in the industry are the techs, they run the show, businesses can't even afford a secretary, let alone a business manager. over time, an infrastructure is built, all the critical pieces are being put together for the masses to actually accept and embrace it, just the functionality mind you, not that they actually use anything. as some technologies start to take off, the business people, the less technical, the ones that care more about money then actually doing anything, move in. the technical guru's have less and less impact, they move on to something else, either early if they get so disgusted they can't take it anymore, or later by being forced out because they're not up to speed with the jones on the latest style (whatever you want to call it) of powerpoint.
any technical people still entering the field do not come from homegrown great ideas throwing all caution out the window, but rather types from the elite institutions that have taken the safe way the entire time and just happen to have the right background/connections and wham, instant hit.
later on, the next phase, even the business types get moved out and are replaced by just the core functions of billing and customer support. all new markets are gone, it becomes a legal monopoly with absolutely no hope any new entries, and no reason for it, for a long time.
and then it starts brand new with something else. in between are large and vast dark periods for everyone involved.
That's interesting and I haven't really thought of it like that before. I'm trying to get a small web software/services business going, and are working on it mostly with two family members and another close friend. So I could relate to alot of what you're talking about.
But, I do plainly miss the social interaction. At first it may seem nice because you initially think of not having to deal with anyone annoying, but, in reality, most of them weren't that bad. Plus, there are always a few that you become good friends with, or the benefits of a constantly growing diverse social network, new people come in, bring in different ideas. You can't get that at home, I've been doing this for three years, and work can be nice because everyone "gets it". You go out to other social settings, to dinner, bar, etc, very few people will really know what you really do for a living, all the little stuff. This may not seem that big of a deal, but over time it gets to be drag.
Maybe the ideal is some sort of compromise over a person's life. Work in an office for a few years, work from home for awhile, kind of like a partial sabbatical.
Slashdot Mirror
Renting software, subscription based models, etc. will only be of value when that model provides an aspect of the software that could not be accessed on pure client based. For example, a model with all of the standard options but with ability to access new data from a variety of sources for a market or community. This would then provide much more data to work with, solve new problems, new value added.
Take the money and run, use the cash to start something new. "He not busy being born is busy dying."
For me, the managers I worked the best for and enjoyed working with...
One would listen to my ideas, let me do what I want, and generally protected myself and the group from the higher up political infighting. Let us do get our job done, understood that nobody else was going to do but us. He didn't have much experience with the products we were directly working on but did have a lot of managing experience and was fairly intelligent. I would say the fastest way to find out if the person has gone through the ropes and knows what the hell their doing, is finding out about their previous managing experiences, how long was he doing it, how many people, ask what he has learned about it. He also didn't have an incredibily large ego and was more than willing to pass on the credit for good work as much as possible. While this worked great for the group, didn't work so well for him, he got canned after about two years on the job.
This versus another manager I had that while he had a few years managing experience, had an ego that didn't quite match the mush in his head. So, because I kept on wanting to do whatever I thought was best, but since it wasn't his idea, he would always, always, have a problem with it. He had no balls to take on anyone outside the group, always assumed that people outside the group were right and we were wrong, and had absolutely no real understanding of technology, or worse yet, desire to learn about. Took credit for the groups work, rewarded the stupid idiot yes men regardless of any real accomplishments. Well the smart ones soon started leaving, I left within a year, but because he was always looking out for himself and taking all of this credit, got praised by his managers and got some employee award of the year. This didn't last though and I found later he got moved over to one of those small time positions with little responsibility and generally out of the picture.
Now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever had a consistent manager for longer than two years or so. If I were you I would look for qualities that just show experience and at least a strong interest in the technology so at least they will be able to somewhat comprehend what you spend all your time on.
blah blah blah innovation blah blah blah is blah blah blah a blah blah blah feeling blah blah blah or blah blah blah a blah blah blah broadcast blah blah blah of blah blah blah the blah blah blah environment blah blah blah expressed blah blah blah in blah blah blah a blah blah blah way blah blah blah that blah blah blah can blah blah blah be blah blah blah understood blah blah blah or amplified blah blah blah to blah blah blah anyone blah blah blah regardless blah blah blah of blah blah blah time blah blah blah or blah blah blah space blah blah blah my blah blah blah two blah blah blah cents blah blah blah blah
Nothing beats passion to solve a real problem and that is what google is trying to advertise with their bs phd number. Congrats for them, big deal, Broadcom did this for chips a few years ago, where are they now? People with phds are wimps that need a very large security blanket. That being said, it would be very interesting to see what would come from a phd that had to build a business from scratch (no handholding vc funding) and see what happens in five years. Google thinks that through hiring all these phds + 20% free time will provide an ample amount of passion to make it work. All it needs is one very passionate person running the show, unless of course they plan on a cut and run in a couple years when the competition catches up. Look at Apple, Sun, and Oracle, all companies with a CEO that were founded by and continue to produce cutting edge solutions, without anything close to a phd education.
and that is the sign of why IT is past. sure, innovation still happens but it still happens in cars too. it goes like this, the beginning is filled with immense amounts of innovation, nearly everyone in the industry are the techs, they run the show, businesses can't even afford a secretary, let alone a business manager. over time, an infrastructure is built, all the critical pieces are being put together for the masses to actually accept and embrace it, just the functionality mind you, not that they actually use anything. as some technologies start to take off, the business people, the less technical, the ones that care more about money then actually doing anything, move in. the technical guru's have less and less impact, they move on to something else, either early if they get so disgusted they can't take it anymore, or later by being forced out because they're not up to speed with the jones on the latest style (whatever you want to call it) of powerpoint. any technical people still entering the field do not come from homegrown great ideas throwing all caution out the window, but rather types from the elite institutions that have taken the safe way the entire time and just happen to have the right background/connections and wham, instant hit. later on, the next phase, even the business types get moved out and are replaced by just the core functions of billing and customer support. all new markets are gone, it becomes a legal monopoly with absolutely no hope any new entries, and no reason for it, for a long time. and then it starts brand new with something else. in between are large and vast dark periods for everyone involved.
Not sure exactly how much, but did confirm it has decreased over the last 50 years. And I know year to year can vary as much as 15%.
That's interesting and I haven't really thought of it like that before. I'm trying to get a small web software/services business going, and are working on it mostly with two family members and another close friend. So I could relate to alot of what you're talking about. But, I do plainly miss the social interaction. At first it may seem nice because you initially think of not having to deal with anyone annoying, but, in reality, most of them weren't that bad. Plus, there are always a few that you become good friends with, or the benefits of a constantly growing diverse social network, new people come in, bring in different ideas. You can't get that at home, I've been doing this for three years, and work can be nice because everyone "gets it". You go out to other social settings, to dinner, bar, etc, very few people will really know what you really do for a living, all the little stuff. This may not seem that big of a deal, but over time it gets to be drag. Maybe the ideal is some sort of compromise over a person's life. Work in an office for a few years, work from home for awhile, kind of like a partial sabbatical.