MESSAGE
| DATE | 2003-04-30 |
| FROM | Dave Williams
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] First Pass on a new article for the Journal
|
I'll look it over -- already I notice dozens of typos. Please indicate
a deadline for publication, as I won't be able to finish in one day.
- Dave
On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 17:20, Ruben I Safir wrote:
> Where are the Free Software Jobs of Torrorow
>
> A recent local GNU/Linux users group recently ran a thread on viability
> of the Apache in Enterprise. Initial, I thought post, rather poorly
> written, and without a clear context, as being designed to either
> promote some non-free computer usage or just an immature rant made out
> of a young enlightened ignorance. However the follow up messages seemed
> to better understand the nature of the question. The message was really
> not about Apache at all. It was about the creeping nervous insecurity
> setting in when as people consider their future in this information
> techology economy, and the ominous signs on the horizon with regard to
> free Software's role in future business and job oppurtunities.
>
> As originally posed, the question was worded, "Can the Apache Webserver
> work in the enterprise environment. The answer to that question has
> long been put to bed. Not only is the Apache Applications Server
> technology superior to any other current solution for internet services,
> but it has also shown to be remarkably flexible for a variety of
> enviroments from the larges web based enterprises to the smallest
> customized jobs. Apache has been the posteer boy for GNU/Linux and the
> drive force behind many of those "under the radar" installations which
> jump started the Free Software craze in the late 1990's. So the
> question, as it was asked, was a little upsetting. If we rephrase the
> question to, "Since we know that Apache is a top-notch web development
> applications server, and since we know it is widely deployed, where are
> all the Free Software jobs, jobs which many of of have made a
> substantial investment in. Why does it seem that every job, such as
> there are in the recession, is asking for WebShere and Dot Net
> experience?"
>
> Now this is a really good question which deserves exploration. For
> young people in their late twenties and early thirties, their entire
> adult life has been one great economic boon, driven largely by
> enthusiasm for the dawning digital age, and the positive fundemental
> global economic conditions in the wake of the end of the cold war,
> reducing production costs, and gobalization of information and commerce.
> The gains in modern production techniques was itself largely possible
> because of advancements in computer technology.
>
> It's inevitable under these conditions that the ability to produce
> outstrips our ability to consume, and over production occurs leading to
> an economic recession. A healthy economic recession imperfectly shakes
> out business models which are inefficient and which can not be
> sustained. It drives the customer base to the more successful models
> which can be sustained, and even whole industries can collapse to be
> replaced with newer ones established during the previous economic
> expanssion. A healthy recession prepares the economy for its next
> economic spurt.
>
> The recession, especial for the high technology sector, has been
> anything but healthy. The problems in the free Software sector is
> reflective of the general economic conditions. Technology across the
> board has been devastated, even for monopolizing corperations. But the
> economic conditions for Free Software are especially troubling, and it
> is partly a condition of our own making. People who hope to work with
> free Software in the future as a staple of their livelihood, and not as
> just some form of a hobby horse, need to adapt, and adapt soon.
>
> First, let's look at the impediments to economic growth in the free
> Software sector in the coming months. Then let's look at the previous
> successes and failures in Free Software business and do an analysis on
> how we can improve our chances for the widespread business apadtopn of
> Free Software once the current shakeout is finished.
>
> Larry Augustin, the founder of VA Research/VA Linux/VA Software, has
> been fameous for says, and has recently repeated on Don Marti's Linux
> Elitist mailing list, that if we have a piece of software, and the
> software is Free, but the Software is junk, it's just free junk, and
> that he can't go to CTO's in good faith with free junk and advocate the
> ussage of free junk. While this sounds like a reasonable position we'll
> see that this line of reasoning has several serious flaws. It's not a
> viable position to take in business.
>
> It's generally known throughout the technology world that many
> proprietary closed systems, produced and deployed by the largest
> enterprises in the world, are insecure, bug riddled expenssive, high
> maintemnce junk. The quality control on the common corperate IT
> infrastructure fails misserably on multiple levels. As a primary
> example of this, look at the Microsoft Exchange Server and Outlook
> contact and mail client. Few applications have caused more damage to
> the coperate bottom line than this virus plagued, network destroying
> junk. And yet, it's probibly the most popularly deployed enslaved
> software, protocal breaking spamware in existense. The great majority of
> business desktops come pre-loaded and ready with the exchange client,
> all ready to be plugged into this virus propagation network.
>
> Similarly, for years, in its now historic battle with Netscape, this
> same company advocated 'free as in cost' junk on nearly every Microsoft
> Windows desktop in the market. Microsoft had no moral soul search what
> so ever in embedding its Internet Explorer Web Browser technology right
> into the Microsoft Windows Operating System. It took almost 2 years for
> Microsoft's 'Free Junk' to become a viable browser, and today people are
> so used to it, they look at all other browsers as being alien and
> non-standard, even, as in the case of Mozilla, where they are actually
> better than the Internet Explorer product.
>
> And Microsft is not alone in advocating junk, free or otherwise.
> Quickbooks was also initially junk (and still is, in my opinion). In
> fact, it's the kind of junk which breaks basic accounting priniciples
> and now misapropriates your personal data. Adobe, Apple, Peach Tree,
> Oracle, Sun, and nearly every other vendor on the market has
> advocated, or still does advocate junk. What makes Larry Augustin think
> he is so special.
>
> And why stop with Software? Ford motor company sold junk which blow up
> on contact, Chrysler sold junk which rusted prematurely, Firestone sold
> junk which endangered the lives of passangers in their SUVs, Tyson
> Chicken sold junk which poisoned people, McDonalds sells junk which
> makes people fat, Eli Lilly sold junk which destroyed peoples liver,
> Anhuaser-Busch sells junk as their primary product. The key to all
> these companies is their desire to sell.
>
> Michael Kingsley, of Slate magazine, recently reminded my of the ground
> breaking work in economics by John Keneth Gilbraith where Sir Gilbraith
> put forward the proposition that the post-industrial revolution economy
> is dependent on the abilitiy of producers to satisfy markets of their
> own making. Once we got past the basic needs of food, clothing and
> shelter, successful businesses now fill the market to make teeth
> brighter, to feel free on the highway, to be the proudest soccer mom in
> the playground. Free Software, in some basic regards, has failed to
> make its market. Instead, we've been content to let others to create
> markets and for us to try to catch up. Meanwhile, we are missing the
> oppurtunity to create our own market, based on a new creative concept
> which people are going to need.
>
> These patriotic times might be just the moment to focus on the market we
> are trying to build. Enterprises will want information services in the
> future. Individuals will want information services in the future. And
> as sure as Nike sells excitement in a shoe, Free Software needs to sell
> freedom in a box. A sales slogan might be, "Freedom, it's built into
> every box". Free as in freedom needs to move from an explanation of the
> GPL philosophy to a motto which we sell. We need top sell this 'freedom
> junk' and sell it now.
>
> The cause for freedom is compelling as a sales tool. Look at how a lack
> of freedom is contributing to the economic woes of the nation. Look at
> how a lack of freedom has hurt the economy. A causitive agent to the
> depth of this current recession is the artificial restraint of
> innovation and trade in the information distribution segment of the
> economy. One of the few growing information technology markets which
> showed signs of prospering in the early part of this recession and
> developed during the boom of the late 1990's was the music and
> entertainment delivery business. Companie like MP3.com napster and
> others were developing the means for broad, inexpenssive delivery of
> quality music to clinets in a flexible and innovative fashion. These
> companies, and their expanding workforces were poised to hire the next
> generation of information technology professionals. They were snuffed
> out in their youth by a viscious and tyranical consortium of copyright
> holders. A few special interests of media conglamerates and movie
> distribution companies throttled the growing technology economy over
> night. The 6-60 billion dollar in estimated damages the RIAA won
> against MP3.com ended MP3.com as an independent entity, which is now
> owned by Vendi-Universal, Napster was put out of business by the RIAA as
> well. In fact, everyone in the technology business has become scared to
> death of doing anything with music. After all, Bertelsman AG was sued
> for 17 billion dollars for settling with Napster and investing in them.
> Kaazar was chased out of the country, Internet Radio has been regulated
> out of existence, and so on. These actions have produced serious
> depressive affects on the information technologies business.
>
> The direct result of this litigation is that software innovation has
> been sidelined nationwide. Just combining the words, 'computer' and
> 'music' has put a shiver down the spine of business planners. Instead
> of an economy which leverages growing technological innovation and over
> 100 years of recording history for economic expansion, we've let petty
> bickering between autocratic recording industry executives and telecom
> business leaders drive the independent internet service providers out of
> business.
>
> The most grievous abuse of this bickering could be seen in the stock
> prices of AOL-Time-Warner. Here we had a match made in heaven. The
> combination of AOL with Time Warner had the potential to be so
> successful that it sent a chill through the entire internet provider
> industry because of the obvious monopolistic position the new company
> would have on both content and access. Here we had the nations largest
> subscription internet and digital services provider gaining access to
> one of the largest monopolistic reservoirs of content in the world. In
> addition, in Time Warner, there was the obvious advantage of also
> gaining access to one of the largest cable networks in the world,
> permitting for AOL to sidstep one of the largest pitfalls to universal
> broadband access, namely TELCO foot dragging by the baby bells. AOL
> gained content and the 'last mile' of network connectivity in one swoop.
> What went wrong?
>
> The corperate culture of Time Warner entrenched itself and fought AOL
> all the way. Time Warner refused to provide real content to AOL, they
> refused to make the cable network available for AOL, forcing the
> Virginia Fairfax county divission to reinvent the wheel, and Time Warner
> even played with the idea of decoupling to companies after they drove
> AOL's innovative chief executive, Steve Chase, out of the company. The
> executives of Time Warner prefered to loose 2/3rd of its equity value
> rather than freeing up its content for mass distribution.
> So clearly, Free Software can develop a new market, a "Freedom" market,
> and succeed as others have failed. But they also have to overcome the
> huge political disavantage that it currently suffers. Politics and
> business are integrated. Business and free enterprise have been the
> moving force for global democratization since the dawn of civilization.
> As the banking and mechantile classes accumulated increasing wealth into
> the 15th and 16th centuries, demands for political favortism,
> standardized commercial laws, and individual rights became increasingly
> demanded from governments. Governments which heeded this call, like
> Britton and the Netherlands, grew to world dominating powers.
> Governments which failed to heed the needs of business, like France and
> Italy, drove themselves to brutal revolutions and a weakening world
> position.
>
> If your interested in business, but not interested in politics, get
> comfortable with politics now, or get comfortable with a predetermined
> finacial failure. For Free Software to survive in business, it
> absolutely needs a constructive engagement in the political process.
> The only question should be, what does free software need from
> government?
>
> First, free software businesses need free access to all digital
> information and hardware, unencumbered by artifical barriers. It needs
> to proactively fight the varity of Digital Rights Management sceems now
> being batnered about the content industry and some sectors of the
> consumer electronics industry. Free Software needs freedom, and it
> needs to promote freedom.
>
> Secondly, Free Software needs a fair playing field in a competitive
> market place. It needs inexpenssive broadband access. It needs access
> to domestic and foreign markets. It needs a fair and just application of
> anti-trust regulations and sane contract law. If you want Free Software
> to have a chance of succeeding in the market, your going to have to
> fight for a place at the table. Keep your local congressman's phone
> number handy. Don't become confused by rhetorhic which is against your
> own self-interest. Your interest is marking Freedom. Don't let minute
> details confuse the overall needs of your livihood.
>
> Finally, its important to keep your marketing stratergy in front of you.
> If your evaluating the immediate job market potential for different
> technologies, as sure as you can ask if Apache is a viable 'Enterprise'
> server, you shouldn't just stop there. Visual Basic is also likely in
> your future, or advanced skills with the Excell spreadsheet. There is
> no need to just limit yourself the internet specific application
> servers. In the next 6 months, it is likely that VBA and Access is as
> likely to land you a work as much as anything.
>
> The entire technology field is currently in a severe economic recession.
> Much of the reason for this have been already has to do with a lack of
> access to markets. It might well be that the type of tchnology career
> that you envisioned for yourself 3 years ago may never materialize. It
> could be that we are facing a future that only a very few of the
> brightest engineers will make money in the future information technology
> market. And those individuals will be working for only a few of the
> largest monopolies that still exist. The current trend is to put
> controlled but easily exploitable programming tools into the hands of
> non-programers inorder to fill the needs of various industries. It just
> doesn't take all that much guenious to right busines s logic programs,
> and a great number of accountants, human resources people, and
> administrative assistants as capable of doing it. As closed systems
> become systems become simpler and simpler to program and adjust, putting
> these programming tasks directly into the hands of the business user who
> understands his needs makes increaing sense. What kind of job does that
> leave you with a locked down Microsoft desktop with C# marco pluggins on
> every desktop. Even Oracle, today, has simply to use gui tools to
> develop a great deal of the software which people use.
>
> The fact that some people are wondering about the future of Apache in
> Enterprise should make you think twice about your future in the entire
> computing field. Obviously, something about Free Software apeals to
> you, otherwise the question doen't occur to you. What is that aspect
> that you judge so important for your future? It's the freedom free
> software gives you which is the apeal. And it's freedom that you need
> to market to others who you hope to work with and to pay your salery.
> If the question arises as to how to market yourself in the current
> economy, if yur want to continue to work with Free Systems your going to
> have to market freedom.
>
> Look at what IBM has done. IBM has invested heavely in GNU/Linux.
> They've pu linux on the minds of the public. And for that the Free
> Software community should be greatful. But IBM is not sellign Freedom
> and a market. IBM is selling Webshpere, DB2, Java, and mainfraims. And
> the last I looked, there products are no free. They've succesfully
> exploited a free software platofrm but it is only marginally benificial
> to the community.
>
> In 5 years, if every Apache application server running on Free Software
> is replaced by proprietary Websphere application servers, your market
> for work has just srunk and Free Software is no better off than it was 5
> years ago before GNU/Linux was even on IBM's radar. In fact, things
> will be worse because all the end user application services will be
> running off of a closed server on a closed microsoft desktop. The
> innovations in Free Software application development will have come to
> a full dead stop.
>
> And who knows what IBM will do i the future. They can decide to take
> their ball (Websphere) and go home. As a result of IBM's efforts, and
> the efforts of Microsoft, your asking today, "Is Apache ready of real
> enterprise" in the face a huge proven track record of of successful and
> profitable deployment. And yet, it apears that Apache is being
> outflanked by a bungled marketing stratergy of far to many groups. The
> Larry Augustines of the world have put us all behind the eightball. The
> one thing that websphere and C# con not compete on is freedom and
> freedom is the market which we must develop. Freedo, in the long run,
> is the more cost effective choice for businesses and individuals. It is
> far more cost effective that enslavementware. Instead of compromising
> with every closed couces vendor of enslavementware, attention needs to
> be focused on the freedomware we sell.
>
> Lots of money and effort has neen funnelsed into Free software, but like
> the broadband debacle, we are hung up on trhe last mile. We not only
> need to focus on that mile, the piece of software which exists between
> the end user and the computer information which they work with, but we
> need to work hard on building demand for our product.
>
> The time is long overdue for use to stop chasing to enslavementware
> marketing plan and counter with our own unique freware products and
> services. And we must market them up and down the entire technology
> tree. We not only need, for example, good desktop systemsm but we need
> to have unique features that attenuate the freedom and which our clients
> can't live without. We need databases and spreadsheets and
> wordprocessors. But at some point, we need to break with the current
> offerings and make them unique and attenuate the freedom. And if our
> software is sometimes, as Larry puts it, "Free Junk", at least it's our
> free junk and not theirs. We have a better capacity to improve our junk
> than the competititon. And we can improve our junk at a lower cost. So
> when our Free Junk doesn't work, at least all is not hopeless. The
> challenge for those dedicated to getting Free Software into 'Enterprise'
> is to build our market...the market of Freedom, and to sell as much
> "Free Junk" as any of us is humanly capable of.
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
