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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fdb77,c9f2b97a84c48976 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1158e3,c9f2b97a84c48976 X-Google-Attributes: gid1158e3,public X-Google-Thread: 1073c2,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073c2,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-06-18 07:16:46 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!isdnet!psinet-france!psiuk-f4!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,ccomp.lang.clarion,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.vrml,comp.lang.java.advocacy Subject: Re: Market pressures for more reliable software Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 09:59:58 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9gl1h0$9rp$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <9folnd$1t8$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B1FE1FE.B49AE27F@noaa.gov> <9fotpi$4k6$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3b24dc21$1@news.tce.com> <3B25D5FB.15C9B240@dresdner-bank.com> <9g5as6$hbq$1@magnum.mmm.com> <9g5ipg$roq$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9g614i$at4$1@magnum.mmm.com> <9g7r02$mni$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9g840k$qjt$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <40gfitgrvd8cgu27r3vfib6eptmapb3pfl@4ax.com> <9g8lrk$37c$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B2B6D5E.F9AE7CAB@mail.com> <3B2BEA63.34116398@PublicPropertySoftware.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 136.170.200.133 X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 992872800 10105 136.170.200.133 (18 Jun 2001 14:00:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Jun 2001 14:00:00 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8840 comp.lang.java.programmer:77126 comp.lang.pl1:1082 comp.lang.vrml:3857 comp.lang.java.advocacy:21373 Date: 2001-06-18T14:00:00+00:00 List-Id: The basic idea ought to be this: Produce a really good word processor that may evolve for a while as you discover the features people will want. When it matures and stabilizes on a feature set, move on to the next frontier. Don't keep trying to sell the word processor to the people who already own it. Sell them a spreadsheet or a database instead. You can't really get around a mature market. Sooner or later, you've filled the pipeline and the only new sales are going to be to the handful of consumers who are just entering the market or replacing what has worn out. (In software terms, "wearing out" would be analogous to a new hardware or OS technology - the end of useful life.) Put the product on the shelf & accept the trickle of revenue it brings in with little or no cost to you & start looking for the next thing you can build. Eventually, new technology will come around that will demand you go rebuild the product but why waste the resources to rebuild it constantly along the way? MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Al Christians" wrote in message news:3B2BEA63.34116398@PublicPropertySoftware.com... > > The answer you propound is evidently the answer to the question "How > do I get a perpetual income from a single project?" Good software > may be usable in perpetuity, but if the market is competitive, the > price will compensate the seller only for what is sold and will not > saddle the buyer with additional costs (short-term or long-term) for > what is neither wanted nor needed. Reliable software ought to be > produced in a comparatively short time and last a comparatively long > time. The justification for market economies is that they produce a > bounty for consumers (buyers). Producers are supposed to be smart > enough to deal with that. > > Where I live there is some of the back end of the game development > business. That market has adapted to the economics of software as > a permanent good. They produce a game and move on. Embedded software > ought to work the same way. I might not buy an appliance if I knew > there was a permanent development group somewhere continually turning > out bug fixes for the appliance's embedded software. If consumers > prefer to pay once and use forever, it's market failure if they can't > find a way to get what they want. >