From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,e276c1ed16429c03 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g13g2000yqj.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Ludovic Brenta Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada is getting more popular! Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 04:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <8732ea65-1c69-4160-9792-698c5a2e8615@g13g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> References: <4cc4cb65$0$6985$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <5086cc5e-cd51-4222-a977-06bdb4fb3430@u10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com> <14fkqzngmbae6.zhgzct559yc.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.98.68.197 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1288004419 596 127.0.0.1 (25 Oct 2010 11:00:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:00:19 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: g13g2000yqj.googlegroups.com; posting-host=153.98.68.197; posting-account=pcLQNgkAAAD9TrXkhkIgiY6-MDtJjIlC User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.0.6) Gecko/2009012111 Red Hat/3.0.6-1.el5 Firefox/3.0.6,gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14741 Date: 2010-10-25T04:00:19-07:00 List-Id: Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 02:47:38 -0700 (PDT), Ludovic Brenta wrote: >> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote on comp.lang.ada: >>>> As for existing companies offering compilers, =A0you have mentioned >>>> RRSoftware, there are more Ada companies, some of them offer >>>> compilers at quite the usual prices. You'll have to ask, though. >>> >>> I doubt that there is a single company which earns anything from sellin= g >>> compilers. Those who sell or give compilers for free refund from somewh= ere >>> else. >>> >>> This model (also known from Socialism) is not sustainable, so we are >>> observing the number of compilers for all languages declining, not just= for >>> Ada. > >> I don't see what the "sell services, not software" model has to do with >> socialism. > > Redistribution is the key. You pay/invest in not what you get/sell. It is= a > distorted relationship between the producer and consumer. When a greedy capitalist multinational invests in advertizements, do they sell advertizements to you? No. But marketing is a major part of their expenditure. I think we'll agree that that's a distorted relationship between producer and consumer. In the "sell software, not services" model, the software is a vehicle for advertizing and selling the services. If the software is proprietary, you cannot tell how buggy it is or will be in the future and you must depend on a single supplier for the services. If the software is Free Software, there is no catch and no hidden bugs; all the bugs are in the open and you don't have to buy services from the same people that provided the first dose. > As for services. If you sell them, sooner or later you come to the idea o= f > selling them without developing *useful* software. What makes a service > profitable? The point is that service is secondary to the product. It is = a > parasite living on the host. The success of the former means nothing good > for the latter. No, the service is not secondary to the product and you know that. Why else does your company pay for AdaCore's services if they can get the same compiler and libraries for free? Even if your boss only pays to "cover his ass" (i.e. help with certification), that is still a valuable service. >> And this model seems to be more than sustainable for AdaCore; >> this is probably because they made the concious decision *not* to addres= s >> the SOHO market (i.e. high volume, low margins) at all. > > USSR existed for 80 years before it collapsed. You still have not provided a satisfactory explanation of why you think that the "sell services, no software" is socialism, so the comparison with the USSR is meaningless to me. > That this model of software development (not only compiler development) i= s > not socially/economically sustainable is obvious when you consider presen= t > software quality (miserable), the types of software being developed (most= ly > useless/damaging), the amount of resources spend directly/indirectly on > software (huge waste). No, I explain these things by plain and simple greed and short- sightedness from most people managing developers and from most developers themselves. Socialism has nothing to do with that. Proof: the miserable state of software you describe exists also in (some) very capitalist companies selling high-end, expensive proprietary software, especially those who charge only a small fraction of the license fees in "maintenance fees". These companies are simply not interested in fixing the bugs that affect their customers; they are only interested in selling "upgrades". And the unrealistic time-to- market pressures (e.g. arbitrarily fixed release schedules) make it nearly impossible for them to ship bug-free software in the first place. -- Ludovic Brenta.