Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site sunybcs.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!sunybcs!kumard From: kumard@sunybcs.UUCP (Deepak Kumar) Newsgroups: net.nlang.india Subject: Re: State of the Computer market in India Message-ID: <2684@sunybcs.UUCP> Date: Tue, 31-Dec-85 14:14:45 EST Article-I.D.: sunybcs.2684 Posted: Tue Dec 31 14:14:45 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 1-Jan-86 06:42:49 EST References: <1357@cwruecmp.UUCP> <1601@Shasta.ARPA> <1361@cwruecmp.UUCP> <1602@Shasta.ARPA> <166@uscvax.UUCP> Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science Lines: 125 > > 1. There is essentially no system software (e.g., editors, compilers) being > developed by Indian software vendors. The standard way of obtaining system > software is through hardware vendors, who copy and port packages that are > in varying stages of obsolescence in the West. However, some kinds of > application software, notably Devanagari editors and CAD/CAM software are > being indigeneously developed. (What is the quality of such software? Who is > developing it? The big hardware merchants? Independent software houses? > Government? Others?) > Not true. This basically washes out all the R&D effort expended by the computer manufacturers in India. Agreed, that most of the packages are ported from western vendors, but that is to avoid reinventing what has already been invented. Imagine a computer manufacturer after learning about a piece of software, going back to his development team and saying, how about implementing this?! By the time his team has a prototype ready, the package is hopelessly out of date. Instead the manufacturer acquires the software and its source code with a licence to modify, and gives it to his team, which then maintains and builds upon the system as and when the need arises. This is true of most prestigious computer vendors. Besides, I have seen massive R&D teams working on complete from-the-scratch designs for forthcoming products. This includes hardware, as well as software. These ideas are very much triggered by advances in technology, and raw components, rather than complete systems are imported. This has proven very successful as it also has a potential for international market. Just to put things in a concrete perspective, DCM Data Products came up with an automatic attendance recording and time keeping system APRICOT, five years ago. This system has recieved international merit and DCM set up assembly plants in SE Asia to cope with the demand. I'm sure there are a number of products like these. There are sizeable research teams constantly working with designs based on state-of-the-art technology. As far as developing systems software is concerned, again it isn't just a Copy-and-Run affair. I am aware of several indegenously developed systems software products that are really merituous. That includes compilers, debuggers, assemblers, editors, embedded environments etc. There are liasons between the industry the the universities to aid in the development. Computer vendors provide the universities with grant and equipment to help them develop new products. Besides the Electronic Commission has been giving out a lot of research grants to universities as well as industry to aid in the development of indegenous products. To sum up, vendors do adopt a copy-and-sell policy to keep up with the market. However, more sensible vendors do spend money and effort in research aimed at long term goals. There are numerous companies that survive on the copying philosophy, but if they continue, they probably don't last long. All the big computer vendors have sizeable research teams that have a number of indegenous products to be proud of. > 2.In general, end-users lack in-house expertise to develop their own > application software on top of the standard system packages and are heavily > dependent on the original vendor for this. These vendors are themselves not > in a position to make any radical innovations, and will only do low-level > tuning and adaptation work. Their use of the term "research and > development" in this context is inappropriate and misleading. > True for small vendors. For companies that boast R&D teams, they generally tend to have separate Customer Support Teams that do the low level tuning etc. It is true that there is a good percentage of the R&D that is involved in converting/adapting existing software but then someone has to maintain it. However they are also responsible for making 'radical innovations' demanded by the local market. As far as end-users lacking in-house expertise is concerned, it was very prominent a few years ago, but as the available manpower figures rise, they are able to employ experts to take care of their own needs. Lack of expert manpower has flourished a number of consultancy organizations who have also been known to exploit the ignorance of end-users. This, however, is decreasing. > 3. (Extrapolating from 1 and 2) There is negligible interaction between the > software industry and the research divisions of the major universities and > the IITs, with the result that software developers have neither the > knowledge nor the confidence to design and develop state-of-the-art software > of competitive quality. Basically, they are satisfied with grabbing what > money they can in a protected market by selling second-hand, second-rate > software. > Not true. It is just a small scale image of what is going on here i.e. there is the government (The Department of Electronics and the Electronics Commission) giving out money for research to the universities/industry. The industry collaborating with the universities for development. I have seen very healthy interactions and have witnessed and taken part in several such ventures. They are extremely productive and there have been promising results. I am glad that most of these grants don't come from the Defense Department. > > I must emphasize that the above points constitute a "global" picture of the > situation, as I understood it from the postings I have read. My perspective > is that of someone in complete ignorance, groping around to get some idea of > the state of affairs. I would like to see more critical analysis of the > issues in net.nlang.india in the near future. Thanks. > > In my mind, previous discussions were geared towards prospective enterpreneurs who might want to make it big in India. So things were presented in that kind of a perspective. I hope that people posting on these issues do take a global perspective and not bias anyone's impressions on their own viewpoints. Thanx. Deepak. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- UUCP : {cmcl2,hao,harpo}!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!kumard ...{allegra,decvax,watmath}!sunybcs!kumard | CSNET : kumard@buffalo | ARPA : kumard%buffalo@csnet-relay | BITNET : kumard@sunybcs | -------------------------------------------------------------------