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: 103376,1ea92c0e5255811d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-03 07:53:54 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!199.45.49.37!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny02.gnilink.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "Frank J. Lhota" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Way OT: Adam Smith and Software Markets X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 15:53:54 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 141.157.181.139 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: nwrdny02.gnilink.net 1046706834 141.157.181.139 (Mon, 03 Mar 2003 10:53:54 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 10:53:54 EST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:34826 Date: 2003-03-03T15:53:54+00:00 List-Id: > Unfortunately, as this points out in yet another way, the classic Adam > Smith free market works very poorly for software. There is a simple experiment that can show that the market for software, for the most part, works fairly well. Do you have an old PC in your attic? You know, an original IBM PC or compatible (floppy drive or cassette based storage), or an XP running DOS 2.x with a 20 Megabyte hard drive? (Note: I said Meg, not Gig!) If so, some weekend when you have the time, take it down from the attic and set it up again. Recall the days before USB when all hardware had to be installed in a motherboard slot, where it was up to you to resolve IRQ conflicts by fiddling with DIP switches and jumpers, and it was up to you to edit CONFIG.SYS to install a driver. Try out you old word processor, the one that only worked with fixed pitch fonts, and could only render a smooth right edge by periodically inserting extra blanks into your text. And don't forget your first spreadsheet program, the one that is also unaware of alternate fonts, not to mention graphics, embedded objects, or connectivity to just about any other application. Remember when user interface standards were no-existent, sort of like Moore's famous quote, "Standards are wonderful, everyone should have one"? Oddly enough, a lot of people who go through this exercise have found it pleasing and nostalgic. They fondly remember the various clever tricks they devised to get around the software limitations of that era. But let's face it, the only reason anyone has any fun with this stuff is the fact that these hassles are in the past. After this little experiment, all but the most diehard archivist would return the old PC to the attic. In my time, I have constantly seen market pressure fuel many hardware and software improvements. The companies that failed to make improvements in their products have often suffered tremendous falls. (Remember WordStar, the MicroPro word processor that once held over half the word processing market?) I am not saying that we in the software industry could not do better, and I wholehearted agree that software development as it is done today needs much better quality assurance techniques. But one cannot deny how far we have come. The proof of that is just one attic away.