Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 05:34:17PM -0400, bofh wrote:
>
>> Why would you do that? Go read The Software Conspiracy. The author,
>> Minasi, got, on the record, interviews from VPs of development at
>> Microsoft, Netscape, Sun, Oracle, etc basically saying that they don't
>> give a shit about lousy software, because the customers continue to
>> buy them.
>>
>
> Sun also makes hardware. Does that attitude flow into hardware design
> and manufacture as well?
>
> Doug.
Of course it does. Did someone actually make money publishing a book
that states the incredibly obvious?
It's Business Economics 101.
It doesn't matter how many letters you write, it doesn't matter how loud
you yell and complain. If you buy the product, you said, "I like this,
it suits my purpose, the manufacturer did their job". If it is a non-
commercial product (i.e., open source; the idea could be extended to
bootlegged software) and you use it, they did their job.
[to extend the concept: if you use commercial software but don't
pay for it, but help make it The Industry Standard because you accept
using it, you have /aided the manufacturer/ even as you pat yourself on
the back and say, "I didn't give them any money!"]
If you build a better product that costs you more to make, and the
customer won't pay you more for it (either in per-unit sales or in total
unit sales, you are losing the economic game. If your goal is to make a
return on investment, you can't do that. Plain and simple.
If you are in it to profit, every extra 1 monetary unit you put into the
cost of producing a product better end up back on the bottom line. And
then some. Your goal is to make a profit, not shuffle the money around.
Most people whine about software quality, then buy the features, then
whine about the fact it didn't work as well as they hoped. The software
publisher has done exactly what they should, produce a product that
sells with the least cost of production.
Now, let's for the sake of speculation, say in 2004, Microsoft said, "Oh,
people want QUALITY, let's give 'em quality!". So, they put Windows
Vespa ("Promised you a Harley, delivered a scooter") on hold, and send XP
back for a code audit. And a few years later (it's a big project!), the
media will be all over Microsoft saying, "What's the big deal?? It's the
same product as it was before!!!". Not only that, by necessity, it will
have to break a lot of behaviors people are very used to. Now what?
No one will buy the upgrade, no one will pay extra for the software on
their new PC, and all the old XP users will be saying, "It should have
been free Service Pack 3, not a new product!". Result: no new revenue
after probably the largest development effort ever put into a software
product. Do you think that will ever happen again? Do you think I'm so
wrong that you are ready to bet a multi-billion dollar software company
on the good judgment of the mass market consumer?
It's a pretty simple concept, really.
A few years ago, I was giving a talk at a local high school. One of
the students asked me why his computer crashed a lot, "why can't they
build an operating system that doesn't crash?". I told him they can,
they do, but he doesn't want it because it doesn't have all the bells
and whistles he expects. And, it's bad because that's what he was
willing to pay for. This class seems to have understood, it doesn't
matter what you say, it's what you buy. Talk all you want, when you
BUY or USE the product, you have said "This is what I want, and I
want it more than I want the money (goal, standard, ideal, whatever)"
in the only terms that matter.
It is a great honor to work with a group like OpenBSD that will not
compromise its ideals for the sake of "convenience" or "expediency".
It's a very rare thing to find...
If you don't swim to win, you'll never lose. :)
Nick.
