Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake)

[Joachim Durchholz <joachim.durchholz@munich.netsurf.de>]

Tim Ottinger wrote:
> I think this is a sad statement. Is the ability to generate revenue
> the
> only kind of superiority?

Sad or not, this is the way Reality works.
Nobody said that evolution will produce the nicest or most aesthetic
results. The survivors are the meanest, toughest, and most egoistical
traits, moderated only by the fact that cooperation can reap immense
benefits. This is so in biology, and this is so in economy.

> It leads us to think that there is nothing valuable about products
> which
> did not win market share because of poor packaging or marketing.

Commercial success and inherent value have no intrinsic connection. The
only connection that exists is that inherent value can help (and often
does help) for commercial success.
So doing your work well does help in the success of the products you're
working on, but you shouldn't be so megalomaniac to assume that this is
the single criterion for the product to succeed. If that were the case,
all those marketing guys could quit working right now, just as you
proposed to quit testing... the truth is in the middle. All have to do
their work, and your success depends on the efforts of the marketing
guys as well as their success depends on your effort. (I've heard
salesmen complaining about the rubbish they have to force on the
customers... I guess they routinely curse all those software developers
who produce rotten, difficult to use, buggy, and unfit software they
have to sell. And so software engineers and sales people can curse each
other until hell freezes over, and nobody thinks about *improving* the
situation at his shop.)

> In
> fact, it seems to "prove" that all research projects are inferior, and
> therefore invalid, because they're not focused on generating revenue,
> but on developing technically-superior solutions. But research is very
> valuable. It leads to new generations of revenue-producing products.

Yes. But don't expect companies to do much research other than research
resulting in immediate improvements of a product. This company research
can even be harmful to public welfare; I remember having read that the
tobacco companies did something with the acidity of the smoke of their
"light" cigarettes to make them more addictive. I was not surprised to
read about this - it's the sort of thing companies do to improve their
income.
This tendency for egoistical acts is a very common trait in capitalistic
companies (and I think in any other organized endeavour). The only
countermeasure are laws and a culture that puts guilt on such behaviour.
This doesn't totally prevent amoralic behaviour, but it helps.

Sorry, life ain't easy or nice... there were no promises when you
started life, or?

Regards,
Joachim
-- 
Please don't send unsolicited ads.