Re: GNAT GPL is not shareware

[David Botton <david@botton.com>]

> RRS started low-cost compilers in 1984, long before GNAT existed. But 
> whatever.

And then the entire small compiler market for Ada was tiny, and microscopic compared to markets for Turbo Pascal or Turbo C++, in fact Turbo Prolog (I liked that) was probably larger a 1000 fold.

Many companies did excellent in the low-cost compiler market in those days. None of those companies exists per se now. (Borland for example, whose catalog is still dragged along for old customers even with some enhancements)

> But if there is no market, then there is no point in making a compiler at 
> all, because giving it away will not pay the bills.

Correct. That has been the case now for a long time.

Like most things these days you need alternative models for monetizing your creative ideas since the old ones are used up, that is part of progress.
 
> Outreach in the form of demos, GPL versions, etc is cool, but not if it 
> cannablizes your main revenue stream (whatever that is).

In a world of libre software if giving it away would cannibalizes your business then you have no real business model, fools will do things to slow the bleeding like shareware... smart companies understand the code today is not the product and can not be the product, it is just a means to the end.

Support is one revenue stream but there are many others one can tap in to in any market. In general every market today needs to be creative to generate revenues.

Examples beyond compilers:

Evernote - 30% of its monthly sales was in _physical goods_ in Dec 2013, 3 months after launch. I don't have recent numbers but I suspect far more now.

I make a large part of my medical clinic revenue from alternative revenue streams. 40% of the people that come to me for medical assistance can not afford it or if their insurance not paying for the services there is a mental barrier to out of pocket for care even when needed. So I discount or offer my medical services for free and make up overall with other services and products they are willing to pay for and/or can afford. (Another example of my win win approach to business and proof it always works, and closer to the idea of OpenSource)

I built a school over the last few years, also using creative funding methods (All win win situations, those that can't afford have schooling options, etc. etc.) and a few other projects and business all succeeding using creative funding methods. (Each again with win win scenarios for everyone)

There are many ways anyone can succeed when they have the humility to find them and if they try a win win way of doing it are usually blessed with much success.

If even a pompous guy with a blown up head like me can find avenues to success, any one can :)

> So I'm not quite sure what your point was. Which is probably why I missed 
> it. :-)

<< Most of these vendors have the same small minded thinking of only looking at direct sales instead of expanding the user base through mass marketing efforts through free or cheap compiler options.>>

Point was:

There is only doom to vendors that think their products are the compilers.

That it is counter productive to place any stumbling block in the way of Ada use for any purpose since the compiler is not the source of revenue and the larger the base of Ada users in all markets the larger the pool of those that will influence a potential customer to buy the real products vendors offer or could offer.

Here is a recent example of small minded thinking:

https://www.mail-archive.com/gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org/msg100382.html

Unless the tools needed to build with gpr file are up streamed to the FSF the barrier to a working toolset out of the box got even larger. [I will gladly eat my words and even apologize openly if gprtools and its dependencies xmlada and gnatcoll are up-streamed to the FSF and become part of the regular build of the toolchain] - ya ya someone will write download from libre.. start a new thread if you want to argue about why I am wrong to say it has to be through the FSF, don't hijack this one.

GPL as a weapon rule #2 - You don't have to deliver source that works easily, just something that could work if you knew how.

Rule #1 we all know - infect the outputs with GPL virus to encumber your victim

GPL is a gun (letters spell gnu... hmm) used correctly it brings security to all - everyone can see what's inside, improve on it, etc, in the wrong hands a gun to cripple innovation through "technically correct" uses of the GPL.

> And all of those things require people skills that many 
> software developers don't have and can't realistically acquire (I suspect 
> that many developers are borderline autistic).

And so the rule that the key to success of a business is the team's diversity of skills. The places I do have partners they are rarely like me in any way, but share my passion for whatever the goal of that organization is or has been. I choose my employees, partners, etc. based on their passion for the goal, _before_ even their skills. (Heck you all get to decode my poor grammar and spelling from banging out a post barely proofing it first, and most just accept me for my passion for Ada and forgive it :)

> But people that have those sorts of skills have many opportunities better 
> than software. So it's hard to imagine who will be filling these jobs

If they have people and software skills they tend to do both or bring together teams of people on both sides. If they don't have software skills but just people skills they bring together software teams for common goals.

My experience is that sometimes we don't evaluate where we fit in to things and do not team with the right diversity but instead pick people just like ourselves that will not rock the boat and be "yup" men.

> And the people who traditionally have built software are unemployed or 
> underemployed.

Those that didn't continue expanding their skill sets usually. There are only so many jobs for people that no the ins and the outs of Wangs :) (But I do know someone making a living there too... I wonder what happens when that job is gone for him)

> (Of course, most jobs will be automated in the coming years, 
> so that is going to be a growing problem for society to deal with.)

And those that expand the skill sets in to the new areas that come with it will succeed.

During the Cultural Revolution in China they stupidly killed off most of their greatest treasures, their culture and past to replace it with the new "western" knowledge. Main land China almost completely destroyed their medical knowledge base in the zeal for it. If it wasn't for post revolution efforts to take the remnants and force them to work together to record their knowledge even more would have been lost than already was. They then took the old knowledge applied western and innovations abound.

The past offers gems for the future, so I write "expand" not replace or even add. The idea behind Gnoga for example is to expand Ada to current tech outside the safety critical niche. With that Ada gets more life and those that know it can expand with it. One hand on the past (Ada just like Chinese medicine of the past is just as much also the present) and one hand on the future.

As is I am using borrowed time for Ada, but I wish I had more time. Such a rich past deserves a rich future. I hope others will find some passion this year for some new way to use Ada or new interface to modern tech, etc.

(BTW, having been many times on the hiring boards for large companies or startups, we always grabbed up people with innovative public projects before anyone else, even with tons of degrees, etc., it showed they have initiative, drive, passion, and skill)


> There's little of value beyond software sales

I can assure you there is or the companies making google plex amounts of money giving software away for free wouldn't be making it ;)

> (and I don't consider 
> "maintenance contracts" a-la AdaCore any different than sales).

They are sales, just not direct software sales, but service sales.

Confusion what the product really is, is why things are stagnant beyond the niche and bleeding around it.

> Most remaining jobs are glorified marketing jobs that society would be better off without.

South Florida is flat, no valleys and no mountains (highest point in my county is a small hill at a botanical garden I like to bring the family to), yet there are many jobs available for the right skill sets.

I am hoping that Gnoga will allow Ada programmers the ability to write and sell products for small businesses, the old software pioneering. (Yes is direct sales, but if they are innovative far more ;) I get calls every week asking if I know someone that can write for their company a program that does X, etc. They don't care how just that it is done quick and reasonably priced. So at least for "our guys" there is a win win to come.

> I'm sure it's possible to make money from software, because it's possible 
> for con men to make money from nothing, but whether its possible to make 
> money and retain one's ethics is highly dubious.

There is a beautiful world out there. Most of it is far away from government related projects though :)

In summary of all that hot air:

Expanded_skill_sets + humility + passion + win_win = Success.

David Botton