Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!ucbvax!CYBER.WIDENER.EDU!Joshua.R.Poulson
From: Joshua.R.Poulson@CYBER.WIDENER.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: A lot of stuff that's been happening lately
Message-ID: <5A081709262803CC-MTABWIDENER*Joshua.R.Poulson@cyber.widener.edu>
Date: 23 Aug 90 14:57:35 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 69

(Despite my warning at the bottom of my message, I have received private mail
concerning my previous message... tsk tsk)

However, I will respond to the message on the list:

harkcom@pa.yokogawa.co.jp writes:
>    But the problem is that it will become a product because the companies
> won't need to service it.  You'll get bad quality software at expensive
> prices, leading some foreign nation to move in and take over the market.
> That is what legislation and all this look and feel bull**** are going to
> give the US...

Sure.  The software developers definitely need to get their act together.
Right now the hot item for all the companies to do is advertise about their
software support hotlines and other goodies.  That's real American marketing
at work as always (it's the only thing we do really well anymore, isn't it?)
and the consumer is getting screwed as a result.

What I would like to see is legislation requiring a BASIC amount of service
for shrink-wrapped software.  Except, of course, I hate legislation.  I am
one who subscribes to the "govern least to govern best" ideal (which is nice
but it doesn't work).  Consumers still vote with their money.  When shareware
comes out that's better than what's on the market all those developers are
going to need to scramble.  Look at what ProComm did to the communications
program market (which was going to the dogs, IMHO).  Of course, now that
market is getting stagnant again... but it'll clear up.

I complained at great length that people have to pay much more to develop
software now, compared to what they used to.  Do you think I want to pay
$500 for a software development kit and another $2000 for seminars and
then $100 for some great books that should have come with the SDK to begin
with?  Well, I am paying for it and that's a shame.  I would rather not.  I
feel sorry for the little developer that doesn't have a Univerisity footing
his bills.  (I pay for it too... I don't get the big salaries of the big
companies, AND I don't get to do interesting BIG projects.  Everything in
school is so small-scale.)

>    I thought most of research was done in universities anyway.  Or
> from the comments previous to this, the real research is being done at
> universities.  The development costs of most software companies are very
> small.  Most businesses find someone who has done something good on their own
> and crank it into shape then slap a humongous price tag on it because of
> all the work (ads, martinis, getting people laid, etc) that went into it.

Some of that work gets done in universities too ;-).

A lot of theory gets developed in Universities.  A lot of practice gets done
in the field.  The people who actually use theories to make superior software
deserve to charge a little for it.  It costs money to get a Doctorate in
Computer Science.  It costs money to get a nice enough machine to develop
real software.  It costs money to find out about all this little specifications
out there (VCPI, GUI, API, the I-suffixed acronyms are coming...).  It costs
money to figure out if you are violating legal things.  It costs money to get
and enforce your own copyright.  It costs money to get your message to your
target market.

I think it costs less money to seduce a little company and sell its product.
There are still lots of big costs involved.

It cost 10 million dollars to market Microsoft Windows 3.0.  They're bringing
it a lot more than that back (especially in complementary products like Excel
and Word and Project and Powerpoint and... well you get the idea).  I think
that Microsoft handled this one well.  There are glitches in Windows but they
will be fixed.  Microsoft handled this upgrade VERY well.  It's cheap.  It's
easy.  It's well supported on the phone.  What more do you want?  It's the
way Windows should have been in the first place.  Now if you could only write
programs for it as cheaply...

Enough rambling from me... --JRP [Joshua.R.Poulson@cyber.widener.EDU]