Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!hplabs!hpda!hpcuhc!hpsemc!mbk
From: mbk@hpsemc.HP.COM (Miles Kehoe)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Apple responds (was Your chance to ask Apple)
Message-ID: <620020@hpsemc.HP.COM>
Date: 3 Mar 89 19:55:58 GMT
References: <26279@apple.Apple.COM>
Organization: HP Technology Access Center, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 55

The truth is that Silicon Valley has grown up, become a 'mature
market', and risks losing touch with the people who made it
the success it is.  This isn't a flame at Apple... most companies
do the same sort of thing. 

I can understand that an active developer support program costs
a bundle.  Apple has been among the leaders in providing excellent 
high quality support for years.  In fact, I would argue that
one reason Apple has been so successful in the end user market
is because of their investment in developer support.

Sadly, when bean counters start to propogate and 'cost jusitification
studies' become rampant, a company stands to lose its edge.  Soon
things that were 'givaways' which made the company profitable come
under scrutiny and a VP of Finance somewhere sets in place a program
so that 'every program has to pay for itself'.  The newly modified
developers program at Apple is just a recent instance of this sad
fact of corporate life.

The previous note in this thread claimed that the cost of a
$70 million per year program was just too high to go without
breaking even.  For the last 10 years, most of that cost was
justified because the profit from selling tons of system made
Apple highly profitable.  Now, someone who has not seen
(or possibly just can't quantify) the contribution to profit
of an active developers' program has put in place a program to
charge money for the service.

I really do not fault Apple here - my company has done the same
sort of thing in several places, and each time the effect has
been the demand decreases for the service.  I'm sure the $70M
expense will end up much lower in the coming years, even if
it does look more profitable 'on paper'.

(Remember last Fall when Apple raised prices and became much
less profitable inthe process? Notice that prices are lower
again - and, of course, so is the stock)

I guess the invitation I'd make to all who have anything to do
with developer programs and/or system sales is this:  Is Apple
(read 'any hardware manufacturer' really) doing the software
developers a favor by helping them write code on their platform,
or are the developers doing Apple a service?  Most corporate
managers seem to feel the hardware manufacturer is the one doing
a favor 'helping out' the developer - often "just at break-even
cost".  I'd propose that it is the developer who is doing the
hardware manufacturer the favor.

To paraphrase an ad for PC software I saw a few years ago: How
many uses can you think of for a computer without software?

My employer, sadly, does not agree with my statements, and would
probably disavow them if they knew.

mbk@hp