| «« Roll Your Own ApplicationWindow OnOpenListener | Software Needs Communication »» |
|
About
I'm Ryan Lowe, a Software Engineering graduate living in Ottawa, Canada. I like agile software development and Ruby on Rails.
I write this blog in Canadian English and don't use a spell checker. Typos happen.
Projects
» Full-time Ruby on Rails freelancer
» Full-time with Rails since May 2005 » Former committer for RadRails (now Aptana) » I also have a few Rails side-projects in development: 1. wheretogoinTO.com Toronto nightlife 2. Hey Heads Up! TODO list and sharing 3. Layered Genealogy family history research 4. foos for foosball scoring 5. fanconcert for music fans (on hold) Hiring Rails developers? I can telecommute by the hour from Ottawa, Canada »» Email: rails AT ryanlowe DOT ca
BulletBlog
Now hosted on Hey! Heads Up -- check it out!
Syndication
Pings
Recent
Derek Lowe's (Ryan's older brother) words at Ryan's funeral
blog@ryanlowe.ca no more Forging Email Headers: Good, Bad or Ugly? Sarcastic Dictionary (Part 1 of Many) Tags Hierarchies Twisting Rails is Risky Business Risky Business? My Take on Early Alphas Whoa, it's August 2007 Closing Comments A Postscript to "Growth at the grassroots" »» All Blog Posts
Linkage
del.icio.us/ryanlowe
technorati/ryanlowe.ca/blog Aurora Roy Jim Andrew Trasker Travis Kibbee Karen Dr. Unk Ayana Van Bloggers Joel Spolsky Robert Scoble Tim Bray Dave Winer Raymond Chen James Robertson Ruby/Rails Bloggers rubyonrails.org weblog David Heinemeier Hansson Dave Thomas James Duncan Davidson Mike Clark Jamis Buck Signal vs. Noise Tobias Luetke Amy Hoy: (24)slash7 Jeremy Voorhis Eclipse Bloggers Planet Eclipse EclipseZone Luis de la Rosa Eclipse Foundation Kim Horne Billy Biggs Ian Skerrett Mike Milinkovich Bjorn Freeman-Benson Denis Roy
Archives
|
Let's Talk About the "I" Word: Innovation
Mike Bell says in my comments: "As an economics student, I have to say after reading all this stuff about how programmers are so confused and out of touch with reality that it's not even funny anymore... it's sad.". Sad is expecting a job in a market that can't support it. Reality is free software is here to stay, so let's kick its ass by innovating. Just like there are economists willing to give away free knowledge about the economy, or a doctor or lawyers that do pro bono work, there are people that are going to write free software. I think professionals owe it to society in general to share the wealth once in a while. What makes any of those other careers possible despite that? It's value added. Software companies can throw far more resources against a problem in a shorter amount of time because they are paying people. Free software has a horrible time to market and besides a few exceptions the process does not scale well. So corporations still have the advantage on big projects. I write free software but I don't advocate it in all situations. I'm an idealist about freedom but I'm a capitalist. I'm also a realist. Free software isn't going away just because we want it to or because it might put all of us out of a job one day. I *know* free software takes jobs away from people. Is this fair? Yes, because the jobs they had were so "trivial" they are replaced by someone's work in their spare time. Do I have a lot of sympathy for people marginalized by free software? Not really. Do factory workers fear automation? You bet -- but it still happens. Do programmers get an exception just because we think of ourselves as more trained or more intelligent? It can't happen to us! Right? No. Progess will happen but the factory workers still get jobs doing other things and guess what -- so will we. You know, the whole high tech dream world is interesting. It's almost like they expect regular economics or politics (globalization) to NOT affect them, to go around the whole industry. HELLO? Your job is not safe. It doesn't matter if it's outsourcing or free software. No one owes you a job just because you have a computer science degree. Having said all of that, I don't think free software will effect us as much as people are worried about. A few segments are more vulnerable than others. Traditional consumer COTS software is the most targetted because it is used by more people that have the technical know-how to replace it. Stuff like Windows, Office and all of the common windows apps. They will all be replaced by free alternatives if they just stagnate for the next few years and don't add value. Why? Because free software will be good enough to do the job AND because it was given the time to catch up in features. Who do I blame for that? The companies for not staying a step ahead and consistently adding value. Having no innovation for years and years lets the free software guys catch up and eat your lunch. Server software is another free software area ... except this one is now being sponsored by companies! The rationale is a little different -- instead of freedom for individuals, companies see free software and open standards as a way to level the playing field. Now you have to add value somewhere else (an easier to use front-end GUI, for instance -- like Mac OS X), and the power is swinging back in the direction of the agile little company that innovates, after being wayyyyy in the other direction for so long. The large companies still have the advantage because of sheer resources but they still complain about losing their massive market position and ability to have vendor lock-in. Freedom makes vendor lock-in go bye bye. Find another way to make money. As much as you guys groan about the computer service industry, custom software will never go away. The honest truth is: as human beings that are now technologically enlightened, we will never run out of processes to automate or improve. Even if the government goes Linux straight across the board they will still need people to write custom apps for the platform to do the tasks. To hand out marriage licenses, take payments for parking tickets or issue passports. These systems will also have to be maintained. Nevermind that once the public gets a taste of this software, they'll want more of it! It's easier to deal with a web form than to have to travel down to the passport office every five years. Not all service/consulting jobs are travel all the time, either. Just look at the city of Ottawa: there are tons of contractors doing work for the federal government and they never leave Ottawa. Embedded applications are niche and will continue to be written by closed source companies that understand the advances in hardware. Free software can't keep up (a few use Linux but the apps are custom, you get the idea). That includes cell phones and PDAs. Same with networking equipment made by Cisco and Nortel ... it's too niche and there is too much cutting edge research involved. Yes, you've realised it ... these segments innovate. I still see plenty of opportunity for paying software jobs out there. Young (and old) programmer, instead of belly aching about not being able to find a job in your favourite field because now people make the software for free, pick a field were they still add value over free software. Maybe this is exactly the kick in the pants the industry needs to INNOVATE AGAIN. Harsh competion is usually a great motivator. We have to show that we can produce better quality results than free software or outsourcing in yet another "new economy". These are exciting times ... no more sitting back on our heels. The factory workers got over it because now they get their goods at half the price they used to. They found a new job putting together photonics equipment and got paid twice as much. Then they lost their jobs again and are doing something completely different. They learned a new skill and adapted when the economy changed. We should adapt too. Posted at March 02, 2004 at 06:36 AM ESTLast updated March 02, 2004 at 06:36 AM EST Comments
I got half way through your writing and I realized the one reason I don't think FREE software will ever replace COTS in corporations: ACCOUNTABILITY let's face it, MS and other big companies don't really care about the average Windows user, they make all their money from corporation licence fees and services. If I'm a big company, who do I turn to when my email client messes up? Who do I call when I can't get Websphere set up properly. At no time in the near future, will the head of an IT organization face a mission critical situation by saying 'let's post to a newsgroup' as a first answer to a priority 1 situation. Speed of response is something that goes hand-in-hand with accountability. The accountability the MS and others offer is the real key here: If Outlook doesn't work, I know who to contact. Orgs pay good money to support their software, and *generally* it is worth the dimes for piece of mind. The real money will be in creating services companies that offer support for free software. If consultants existed in the field of Free Apps, then companies may go the way of paying for services versus paying for licence fees... as typically they do both at this point. If my company knew who to contact for open-sourced software support they would be more likely to pay $200 an hour for support, as opposed to $2000 per user license... Plus that way it is a residual cost and not a balance sheet breaker every January... and you are not tied into any one licence, if it's good, use it. If not, move on. T. » Posted by: Travis at March 2, 2004 10:50 AMYep, that is a common so-called "open source business model". You sell support for a free product. If it breaks, people have the peace of mind that someone will fix it for them. The software is free, but like all software it requires upkeep. The problem with EULAs (end user license agreements) is that by themselves they absolve the seller of the software from almost all liability. If there's a major virus in Outlook you can't blame Microsoft for it. There goes accountability. Another company may sell you a service contract to maintain Outlook and install virus checking software but as far as I know, once you buy the software there is no guarantee it won't mess stuff up, other than having the company's reputation riding on it. Nothing even close to an engineering stamp. Otherwise, every time there's a virus outbreak and it deletes all of the DOC files on people's computers or it uses 100 times the regular bandwidth and you're stuck with the bill, companies could sue Microsoft for damages. Nope, instead there is no guarantee. It might make you warm and fuzzy to buy Microsoft but in the end the EULA says you're on your own. We accept it, of course, because we're willing to take the risk for the benefit of the software. EULA's are standard for pretty much all software, not just MS's. They need to cover their ass, it's understandable. Software is too unpredictable and complicated. Maybe corporate contracts are different though ... I've never read one. » Posted by: Ryan at March 2, 2004 12:47 PMYa, I'm talking more the day to day problems, mainly in MS case with Exchange Server. Regular maintainance is usually covered, so at least there is someone to fall back on. Plus, I would assume the level of comfort that comes with paying for MS support, is much much higher than paying for support from some un-proven software. The EULA (or CYA-LA) as we use to call it, is a great way of avoiding lawsuit-type issues, but the SLA (service licence agreement) usually trumps it in a day-to-day situation. T. » Posted by: Travis at March 2, 2004 01:51 PM |