last updated:04 Nov 2002 16:06 UK time

JOS Statistics - Recent Comments (Comments added for week ending Sun 03 Nov 2002) | View Other Weeks

Writing Specs - Not my job | Sun 03 Nov | anon

How do you get around the fact that a lot of programmers and/or companies feel that it is not the job of the programmers to write specs. One place I work at feels its the sales departments job to write specs.

Sun 03 Nov | anon | Just to add, that as a consequence of the management feeling that the Sales department should write specs they never get done.

Hallway useability Test | Sat 02 Nov | Art Vandelay

Which City Desk Toolbar Buttons config would you prefer. 1) Save 2) Save and Close 3) Close 4) Save AND Close 5) Neither 6) Both 7) New - New and Close - New and Close and Save - Close and New and Save and Close and New...

Sat 02 Nov | Alex Chernavsky | '4', with the condition that if you hit 'Close', you will be asked whether you want to save your changes (assuming you made any) before the file is closed.

Sat 02 Nov | Tim Sullivan | 'Save and Close'. CityDesk has a 'Save' item in the File menu. There is also a Ctrl+S shortcut for it. 97% of the time I want to close my document when I hit save in CityDesk. However, here is a great example of why customizable toolbars are super-keen. That's what I'd REALLY want. I want to be able to remove the buttons I don't want, and add the ones I do.

Sat 02 Nov | Matthew Lock | Hey Art, how's Vandelay industries going?

Sun 03 Nov | Art Vandelay | It's a highly elastic Business. Is 2 a representative sample?

Sun 03 Nov | Justin Van Patten | I like the Seinfeld allusion.

A case for subscription software | Fri 01 Nov | Jeremy

Theres a lot of talk (mostly on Microsoft) about why subscription licenses dont work. I think its because subscriptions are only seen as good for the company, and not the customer. But what if the software actually cost less for the end user? What if they got more with a subscription? Lets say you could pay $500 today for a classic software license and $250 for an upgrade every two years. Or, you could pay $100 for the software every year. After five years, the classic model would cost the user $1000 dollars, and the subscription model would cost only $500. Thats a good savings for the user. Does that mean the software company has lost $500 per use? Probably not. In fact, the company might be able to make more money. Youd need twice as many users with the subscription model than with the classic model. But the entry price is only one fifth of the classic model. It depends if your market is price-sensitive, but such a big difference in price could attract many more than twice as many customers. That could generate more revenue than the classic model. Its just a matter of convincing the end user that the subscription model is good for them. You could do that by giving subscription customers: - any version they want to use with their subscription. They can upgrade to the latest version, or not. Its their choice. - unlimited support. - access to resources they cant get with the classic model (user forums, special previews, tutorials, etc.) If customers were offered both model and explained the value, I think theyd choose the subscription model.

Fri 01 Nov | Chris Tavares | The big problem with software subscriptions is this: I buy a subscription to MS Word for $100 for a year. I start typing my PhD thesis into it. 12 months later, I don't renew the subscription. Now, how do I edit my thesis? That data has been effectively lost, because the only way I can access my Word docs is to have a working copy of MS word, which I don't have because the subscription timed out. Unless the data is totally open, subscriptions will never work because of this data lockin. At that point subscriptions become extortion - 'You pay us or all your data goes bye bye!'

Fri 01 Nov | Jeremy | But isn't that true as soon as you buy a proprietary product like MS Word? Once you build up a collection of documents, switching to another product (regarless of the license) is an issue. As for the renewal process, I think of it a lot like moving into an apartment. I'm not buying a condo and paying full price, but instead I'm paying a monthly fee to use the space. As soon as a I stop paying rent, I don't have the right to be in that space. I would have to move, and that could be a hassle. However, I don't need to have a lot of money initially. Does that make renting an apartment extortion?

Fri 01 Nov | Mark Brittingham | In my business we have both a monthly subscription product (web-based) and a Windows based straight-sale product. I've spoken with a lot of customers about subscription charges (monthly, quarterly, yearly, etc.) and about how they like to pay for software and I've yet to speak with anyone who likes subscriptions. By far, the largest group of our customers is comprised of people who want to buy software, get a CD, and call me only if they need me. Even if they are quite likely to buy an upgrade, simply having the choice to say yes or no depending on the features being offered is critical. The people who do buy into the web product never do it in order to gain the low monthly cost. They do it because they need access to the web for their users (our software provides medical and fitness-related screening). My sense is that people simply don't like having another monthly bill. They would rather pay the money (our systems cost upward of $3K) and *have* it, then worry about the day when they can no longer access their software - even if they have to pay more up front.

Fri 01 Nov | Chris Tavares | >>> But isn't that true as soon as you buy a proprietary product like MS Word? Once you build up a collection of documents, switching to another product (regarless of the license) is an issue. <<< There's a big difference, though. When I buy a regular license for MS Word, it works forever. If I buy a subscription, it STOPS WORKING when the subscription runs out. MS wants subscriptions so that that can continue to soak people for money without actually offering new features. They're pretty much run out of things to add to MS Office, and they can't charge for strictly bug fixes.

Fri 01 Nov | Dan Sickles | The biggest problem with subscription software is it's not free. http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6414

Fri 01 Nov | chris | Comparing subscription software to renting an apartment obviously doesn't address the concern raised by not being able to get to your data. The only way the comparison makes sense is if you are not allowed to move your furniture out of the apartment and if you don't pay your rent you lose your furniture too.

Fri 01 Nov | X. J. Scott | Losing access to your files is a serious issue. By subscribing, this becomes a higher risk in two other ways also: 1. The company goes out of business. Your subscription expires. Your data is gone. Note that in these sorts of scenarios it is not unheard of for the out-out-business announcement to come suddenly and unexpectedly since they don't want to cause a panic among their customers until it's too late. 2. Wow you saved a few dollars by subscribing instead of buying. Oops think again -- the next year your subscription is being raised from $100 to $25,000/year. Take it or leave it, buddy! There's no guarantee that the subscription rates won't go up endlessly once they have you by the balls. Cable TV, anyone? -- On a related subject, I no longer buy anything with disk-based or dongle based copy-protection unless there is absolutely no other choice. Three times now I have lost valuable data representing years of effort because the dongle burns out and the software is no longer supported or the company has gone under. It doesn't matter how much better the software is than its competitors -- losing all my data is too big a risk. I've learned that the hard way.

Fri 01 Nov | JWA | 'Comparing subscription software to renting an apartment obviously doesn't address the concern raised by not being able to get to your data. The only way the comparison makes sense is if you are not allowed to move your furniture out of the apartment and if you don't pay your rent you lose your furniture too.' Actually, that is a great comparison. In your example of MS Word, you could certainly move your data (furniture) out before the subscription (lease) runs out. You can likely move it out while retaining all of the formatting (presentation, interactive functionality) if you are moving into a new comparable system (another similar house/apartment), or you could move the raw data out into notepad if you aren't (in which case it would be in much the same state as your furniture if you didn't move into another house). Also, you are incorrectly assuming that you loose the files themselves. You still have and own the actual .doc files that you've created. You can easily import them into your next system, if you choose one that offers that option. The 'not paying your rent' comment then isn't particularly correct either. If you don't pay your rent you loose access to the house but retain ownership of your furniture. If you don't pay your subscription you loose your access to the system, but retain ownership of your files, which you can then decide what to do with. 'When I buy a regular license for MS Word, it works forever. If I buy a subscription, it STOPS WORKING when the subscription runs out.' This argument is off point. The originator of the discussion's statement was that if the pricing favored the subscription model *based on the typical usage patterns*, then he felt customer's would choose the subscription model. You can't argue the original statement by disregarding a qualifying statement in the original postulation. Your comment that 'MS wants subscriptions so that that can continue to soak people for money without actually offering new features.' reveals your true point, which is that you don't trust Microsoft and feel that they must be trying to trick you. That may be, but to arrive at that point it would have to be backed by facts. Personally, I agree with Jeremy's opening statement and the theories backing it. Subscriptions might allow the company to lower the overall cost to the customer while retaining their overall revenue and profit levels due to the lower barrier to entry and overall cost of use. I'd even add to it by submitting that even if the overall cost was higher, a likely sizeable market would still exist for it due to the more flexible cost basis (Similar to the auto leasing market).

Fri 01 Nov | Out of subject | Shame on you ! You're typing your PhD thesis with Word !!! Ever heard about LaTeX ?

Fri 01 Nov | mb | If you believe you can provide a cost benefit with subscriptions, offer both choices. Anyone know the status of the EV1 leases? GM did not allow people to purchase the EV1, only lease it. They have chosen to not extend leases beyond this year, even though people have actually sent them money requesting a purchase or lease extension. These people are about the lose a car they like, all because the owner no longer wants to support them, for whatever reason (probably political, but that's irrelevant). The other flaw with the apartment analogy is the physical presence of the apartment. If you don't pay your rent, someone else can pay it and take over the space; your payment of software 'rent' has no bearing on other customers (of non-server based systems).

Sat 02 Nov | Mark Smith | We were revisiting this subject just yesterday and came down in favour of a rental model for our stuff, a choice we'd built into our business plan 18 months ago. ISTM that most of the responses here are looking at the case for subscription software without thinking about what would be offered by any sensible supplier. Only a madman would rent software that locked you out of your data when it expired. If your data within the tool goes read-only then fine, you should still be able to export it to a range of file formats. Second, most software renting firms will offer escrow insurance so that if they go pop, the renters are able to get the source as a last resort. Given the continuity of reveue that the supplier would have, then provided they'd not completely screwed up their choices of market, product and price, then they should be able to scale thier costs to fit their revenues. I know a few of the project management portals have gone bust. I'm not sure what the story was there - perhaps they needed to invest more upfront in infrastructure than their revenues could support. Then the Dotcom crash blah blah blah. Rental actually makes more sense than buying in many situations - scalability being one. Imagine your team gets a much larger project than you normally deal with, necessitating the addition of dozens of contractors. Buying a copy of all your development/testing/management tools adds a significant finance hit on capital, with no way of recouping that cost later. Being able to rent the extra development kit for a few months and then stop paying for it makes a good financial choice. I don't see any difference between renting software and leasing of other capital equipment, which has become the norm. The problem for Microsoft and the big guys is that thier customers already *own* licenced product - they've already taken the hit on their capital and depreciated it against their business costs and can't see a convincing reason to convert. New companies offering new products (like us!) should think carefully before rejecting the idea.

Sat 02 Nov | Albert D. Kallal | This whole debate centers around the issue: Can you get the customer to rent? Can you get the customer to jump on the subscription. There is simply no debate that a subscription type model is the way to go for software. The problem here is coming up with a way to get a customer on the subscription band wagon. IBM, and especially Oracle, and just about every major player in the computer industry is subscription based. Or sold on a maintenance type contract (IBM for example). Oracle has what, 97% renewal rate every year…wow…talk about a lucrative business. Microsoft is just looking at the rest of the industry, and going .. Duh…… (or wow…look how everyone else makes money…we are doing it the wrong way!!). The only dim wits in this whole software industry thing is Microsoft, and they are now realizing that all their competitors have been doing business differently for the last 40 years. (yes..40 years now). Do anyone actually think that IBM cares about selling you some software? No, they want a maintenance or “cost” of use type contract. When I talk to a Oracle employee, they always tell me that IBM prices their software a bit lower then Oracle, but then they make it up in the maintenance. At the end of the day, the cost of paying the employees and costs of developers between IBM and Oracle are about par (in fact, he admits they are about the same cost as the end of the day). In other words, they cost what they cost, and it is that simple. They do not pull a price out of a hat. They charge based on what it costs them to develop and maintain the software. Along the way they do of course make some good coin, and that is why they can pay their employees a good rate. MS just realized that they have sold the farm, and now are tying to get some of the chickens back. The problem is that we all bought chickens that lay eggs for us every year now, and we don’t want to give up those chickens, and start paying for them to lay eggs. It is only the PC based industry that actually sells you the software. Now that the industry has matured, it is becoming like the rest of the computer industry has been since day one. What does software cost to run? Hint: it is not the cost of electricity! As Joel pointed out, software does not rust. I bet the auto leasing industry would love cars that don’t wear out. Just ask Oracle and IBM…. Microsoft originally viewed the software industry as a publishing industry. IBM and Oracle view software like equipment leasing. Either business model can work, but you have to decide which one. Albert D. Kallal Edmonton, Alberta Canada Kallal@msn.com

Sat 02 Nov | X. J. Scott | 'There is simply no debate that a subscription type model is the way to go for software.' For who is there no debate and why do you make that statement?

Sat 02 Nov | mb | 'Microsoft is just looking at the rest of the industry, and going ... Duh……' Baloney. They want the money but they're not going 'duh'. Microsoft was the first company to sell software. (at least on microcomputers). They were one of the major players in *creating* a whole new market which just didn't exist before, a lot of which was based on the whole software purchase scenario. Also think about the 'free software' universe and the blatent copying which was the foundation of much of the creation of the whole 'web' market. As an individual, I never lease anything unless I can predict in advance the length of the lease. So I'll rent a car or a bicycle if it's for a day or two, will buy one if it's for longer. I just don't want other people to control it. A business on the other hand has totally different concerns, and often is better off leasing everything if they can move support costs to the lessor.

Sat 02 Nov | mb | Just a correction: Microsoft does not sell software. They license software. They're quite adamant about that.

Sat 02 Nov | Albert D. Kallal | >>There is simply no debate that a subscription type model is the way to go for software.' >For who is there no debate Well, I guess there is no debate on my end!! As mentioned, I stated *if* you can get the customer to jump on the band wagon. “IF” is a very big word here. >> and why do you make that statement? Because it is dead obvious. What computer company on the planet does not understand this? How in the world can a company sustain a business model without a pay per use? Ms-word is now done. Should the company now just fold up and go away? What business produces a product that does not wear out, and adds value to the daily operations of a business? A person would be nuts not charge for this. If the industry is new and young, then fine the next version of Excel that comes out can offer compelling reasons to purchase it. In the 1950’s, they came out with a new fighter jet every 2, or 3 years. Today, a new fighter platform will probably last 30+ years. At least planes do wear, and have a cost to run. Some old bombers where obviously much more mature as a product, and thus some old ones from the 1950’s are still used today. Fully 60% of the market is still using office97 (that number is a bit old, and things might be better now). They should have been charging me $40 a year to use word (and at that price, I would gladdly payed it…since it is much cheaper then purchsing the whole product all at once). They did not do this, and are now faced with a very dubious revenue future. I cannot see how the current business model they have is sustainable. How will they make money from ms-office? Can anyone explain this to me? This whole issue is so dead obvious. Just look at the rest of the industry such as IBM, Oracle etc, and see how they operate. 2 + 2 = 4 Companies such as IBM and Oracle make you pay, because they have a sustainable business model. Of course, MS does have a brain, and is now trying to change its business model. The problem is, so do consumers, and they are barking at his idea. Why the heck should we give up our current model? By the way, Microsoft got big and successful at selling software as a package, and not a pay per use (IBM and the rest did not adopt, or get big this way). The problem is, now that the industry is maturing, the software as a package model will not work. They make tons of money right now because a copy of windows ships with each new computer. Already, we seeing signs that people don’t need much more than a 1ghz pc. If the auto industry made cars that don’t wear out, then a different business model would have to be adopted here. To bet that next year some new type of car will come up to save the whole industry would be so stupid. The idea that next years version of office is going to be so good that I have to run out and purchase it is utter stupidey. MS knows this, and so do I!! The problem with other examples such as cars, and planes is that they wear,and at the very least have a high cost to run. Software does not rust, and has a low cost to run. Again, my statement will perhaps make more sense: Are you in the publishing industry, or the “software” equipment industry? The publishing model works for entertainment and consumables. When software matures, then that model does not work. If someone can give me an example of a software company with a mature product that still is in business, and does not charge for a pay per use, then I might have to corrected here! IBM knows this, Oracle knows this, MS knows this, and gee..so do I. Albert D. Kallal Edmonton, Alberta Canada Kallal@msn.com

Sat 02 Nov | Jeremy | I'm really impressed with the quality of discusion! This is much more than I was hoping for. I'd just like to comment on one thing: >> The other flaw with the apartment analogy is the >> physical presence of the apartment. If you don't pay >> your rent, someone else can pay it and take over the >> space; your payment of software 'rent' has no bearing >> on other customers (of non-server based systems). It's true that one person buying a subscription doesn't affect other subscription holders, but that doesn't discredit the argument. If nobody is paying rent in an apartment complex, then that building won't stay open for long. Similarly, if nobody is paying to use the software, then that company will collapse. It takes money to run an apartment complex -- just like a software company. Another interesting aspect of the analogy is that an apartment is 'feature complete' when you start renting. If it doesn't have a pool or a parking garage, chances are it will never have those things. However, from time to time, the apartment will get a face lift. After 30 years of use, it begins to look dated. The landlord then spends a bit of money to make it look current again. This might be done to continue to attract renters, or possibly to keep the current renters happy. I'm a Mac user, and recently upgraded from Office 98 to Office X. I could have comfortably run the older version in emulation mode for some time, but Office X just looked right with the other applications for Mac OS X. It doesn't add any new features that matter to me, except that it looks current. The downside is that it cost me several hundred dollars. I would have rather had a subscription that included this upgrade as part of the cost.

Sun 03 Nov | Sam Unoyon | Why not just switch to read-only mode once the subscription expires? That way, the user still has access to his data, but the product is also no longer usable. In fact, isn't that what Microsoft is doing right now? There are free MS Word readers available for download on their web site.

Sun 03 Nov | Robert Moir | Whats funny is the 'If i choose to stop paying then i can't access my stuff in that format' theme. Umm... Can we say 'Duh'? Well.. if you choose to stop paying, thats your choice not that of the person renting the software to you, and you obviously make proper arrangements prior to exercising that choice unless you are a dolt, which isn't the fault of the person renting you the software is it? Looking at the apartment rental analogy, if you know you won't be renewing the lease do you make arrangements to move your stuff out at a conveniant date or do you think you can leave it there and come back and get it 6 months after the lease expired? I personally think rental is a great idea providing it remains an *option* rather than the only way to get hold of something, and it allows for both long and short term rental.

Sun 03 Nov | The Anonominator | 'unless you are a dolt' Huh! So I'm a dolt if I stop paying for rentals. I guess then the best way to make sure I won't be a dumb dolt is not to rent in the first place and avoid that problem. Thank goodness the free marketplace ensures that I will always be able to buy what I need outright and not get locked in to some absurdly restrictive rental agreement. But don't let me stop any of you all from switching over to rental. I'm behind you 100% in your endeavors. I'll just be over here doing things a different way. I guess because I am stupid and don't know nuthin' bout business. Give the customer what he wants? So passe! Oh well, I'll be passe then.

Sun 03 Nov | Robert Moir | uh... Anonominator you might try reading the whole post and replying to stuff in context.

Sun 03 Nov | Albert D. Kallal | Like I said, consumers now have some software. Why should they pay for it? The real problem becomes sustainability. You can go the local computer store and look at the “clearance” bin. You can find $3000 systems for $20 bucks. The problem here is that software has value in its use. If no one else is using it, then it is not very valuable. In addition, what serious company wants to purchase a product, and make a investment to use that product if the company has gone bankrupt? No serous company will go out and purchase used software just to save some money with the prospect of no support. Sure, you can purchase software for a price, and then walk away from the company. Do you want to use a product from a company that does not exists anymore 5 years down the road?? I guess some people do. Right now this whole thing is shell game, since many companies will sell your software, and NOT ask you for some type of maintenance fee for it. This fine for small software investments. Many people purchase disposable razors, and I have no problem with that. However, most companies digging holes in the ground don’t purchase disposable trucks. Also, some people are willing to take a risk, or “the” risk in the hope that the company will still be around in 5 years. Again, I have no problem with people taking this risk. However, as the stakes get higher and higher, then the idea of risking a portion of the company operations on the “hope” that the software vendor will be around in 5 years is a risk that companies are not willing to take. This cost of doing business has to be considered. If the system you think is only going to cost you $5000 up front, and then 5 years later, that company does not exist, and you now have to replace the system with a $30,000 system, you might very well be in trouble. In fact, it can ruin the company financially. At that point, I will bet any company wished they had been paying $150 bucks a month. Heck, why pay $100 for a word processor when you can get a old used one for $10 bucks? I am not telling anyone that you have to rent, or pay to use software…I am simply telling you the way it is. Don’t shoot me the messenger here. I not saying to anyone to rent software. I am certainly saying if you CAN GET your customers to rent..you should. “can” and “if” are big words here. Do you want to deal with a sustainable vendor of software or not? Many will take the risk. In many cases, the downside of the vendor going bankrupt is very small, and again no big deal. Much of the software industry does work this way. In fact, the sellers of many software systems also hope that you believe they will be in business 5 years from now. They certainly may want to take your money and run, but one might want to think how long is the investment in software supposed to last? I have had clients tell me that a 5 year life span for a $10,000 software job is fine. The problem is, we are already 3 years into that project, and replacement prices for similar products are asking $10,000 per year! They are refusing to pay $10,000 per year (that is why they went with me in the first place!!). In fact, they are now starting to complain about general pc support costs (nothing to do with me). Amazing, but I will guarantee that this client will NOT WANT fork out another $10,000 in two years. By the way, they are not on a pay for use contract with me. However, that other company that sells the system uses Oracle for their system, and they have a very high cost. The client of mine was shocked at the price of the other system. Well, that is what the other system cost to run, and it is not a “magic” number pulled out of a hat. Systems cost what they cost to run. It is that simple. Do you want a sustainable business model or not? IBM, and Oracle have this model…Microsoft does not, and is trying to change. Albert D. Kallal Edmonton, Alberta Canada Kallal@msn.com

Sun 03 Nov | Evan | 'Microsoft was the first company to sell software. (at least on microcomputers). They were one of the major players in *creating* a whole new market which just didn't exist before, a lot of which was based on the whole software purchase scenario. ' What rock have you been living under, mb? There was a very mature micro-computer marketplace well before Microsoft was a drunken college dream of BGs. The IBM PC, which was the start of Microsoft came in fairly late in the Microcomputer timeline. There were any number of S-100 Z-80 systems out there before the PC came along. Apple existed well before then, with Visicalc. The Radio Shack TRS-80 existed. Oasis existed before that, with a lot of unbranded applications (it was mostly a vertical market). There were commercial applications for CP/M. Microsoft did not create a market. They just managed to take over the existing market. And, once the PC was cloned, they did it on a single basis: Floppy disks would work in systems from different manufacturers, this being a major problem with CP/M.

Sun 03 Nov | mb | 'There was a very mature micro-computer marketplace well before Microsoft was a drunken college dream of BGs.' Quite possible. I wasn't particularly cognisant of much of anything in 1976 (Gate's infamous 'open letter to hobbyists'*). But my computer history sense is that the Apple ][ (1977?) was the first major microcomputer. Guess what? I also believe the Apple ][ BASIC was a Microsoft derivitave. However I certainly can remember when the competition was much more fierce and diverse, and Microsoft was the 'alternative' choice for many products. Oh, and Microsoft really wants much more discrete licensing terms than even one year. Want to spell check that document? Pay more. Funny that, considering so much of their strength comes with bundling everything along for free. I'm not quite sure everyone's on the same page in this discussion. Some people (Albert and others) claim that if you're a company, rental is the most rational thing to do. Others claim that as a user, purchase is the most rational thing. I claim there's a whole risk-reward spectrum, where unsupported free software (no dollar cost, you can fix it yorself, but no one to sue) is at one end and 'supported' expensive 'rentals' with proprietary formats are at the other extrme (high dollar cost, it gets fixed for you, but you can't even fix it yourself--they have you in their grip, and you hope they don't squeeze too hard, let go, or disapear). Individuals will trend one way, and enormous corporations will trend the other, but everyone will make multiple choices in the spectrum. If you believe that rental is the way with your company, price your purchase option to match--maybe they have to buy your company if they want to buy the software outright. * This looks like a good URL to get the letter from, I haven't looked at the rest of the site: http://www.msboycott.com/archive/microfits/misc/gatesopenletter.htm

Whatever happened to the slashdot discussions? | Fri 01 Nov | jon Kenoyer

Is it just me or has the Signal To Noise dropped tremendously. It just seems like a bunch of narrow minded blow hards who fanatically chant Free Software, Linux and We Hate Microsoft. It used to be you would get some quality opinions, but now it seems people arent experts at anything besides posting to Slashdot. Also the editors are way to opinionated with their story submissions in a childish Im eleet sort of way. Or has it always been this way and its time for me to move on?

Fri 01 Nov | anoynmous marcher in many protests and participant in late night discussions | If you look closely, postings that don't regurgitate preach the party line are moderated down. I saw this same phenomenon in college. The political and religious groups would begin to censor themselves and slowly become more and more fanatical. The more moderate folks would eventually get fed up and quit, or were asked to leave, until eventually there was only a very small and dense core of fanatics left. I never imagined that it could happen on a large scale, with a lot of people, like it has with /. Cool. Are there any other nerd news sites?

Fri 01 Nov | mackinac | >>> Are there any other nerd news sites? <<< I've been reading OSNews, http://www.osnews.com lately. I don't often read the comments on /. anyway. Anybody read the Well? Having to pay can clean things up.

Fri 01 Nov | Brian | Zdnet discussions have deteriorated in much the same way as Slashdot's.

Fri 01 Nov | anon | It may have been that you got more sophisticated. A good model of these places is that you come in new, learn about what they're talking about, then move on. Same with mastering things.

Fri 01 Nov | cheeto | Haven't read it for a while, and it's not exactly news for nerds, but www.kuro5hin.org was an interesting place.

Fri 01 Nov | Bella | The unrealistic, zero-business-sense zealots are mostly unemployed now. They have no real work to discuss anymore.

Fri 01 Nov | Zwarm Monkey | For daily Linux news and discussions, I like LWN (Linux 'Weekly' News). They've had excellent, original tech articles (mostly Linux obviously) for years and only recently added Slashdot-style message boards. The S/N is pretty high. http://www.lwn.net

Fri 01 Nov | same thing is happening here - stop your yapping! :) | >>>>>>>>>> It just seems like a bunch of narrow minded blow hards who fanatically chant Free Software, Linux and We Hate Microsoft. >>>>>>>>>> Hmm. And over here people chant that that slashdot sucks. And everyone is buying into it. In other words, everyone is falling right in line with joel and his thoughts.

Sat 02 Nov | Tired of the Slander | 'other words, everyone is falling right in line with joel and his thoughts.' Not necessarily. Many of the 'geek' sites have deteriorated into constant anti-Microsoft zealotry; so much so that little else is getting out on those sites. Even when the stories are about something else most of the comments still fall into one of several ruts that they can’t seem to get out of. It's rather sad, and for someone like me who loves to read about new technology it's ruined the experience. The obsessive monitoring of each and every thing Microsoft does and spinning several stories a day of anti-Microsoft rants (even when they’re not remotely newsworthy) is absolutely ridiculous. I'd much rather read about some cool new technology -- whether it's developed by Microsoft or somebody else -- than the uninformed political bullshit that /., ZDNet and similar sites are now constantly spewing. I'm sick of it, so that's all I have to say.

Sat 02 Nov | anon | Slashdot itself is great. But if you've listened to CmdrTaco/Hemos' Geeks in Space radio show, even they consider 99% of the discussion awful. If you're willing to go through the comments, on some articles you'll find some informed posts. Never good threads, but good individual posts. Slashdot was not designed for discussion. The forums were a low-energy afterthought. It's fine as it is; if there's a story really interesting to you, it's worthwhile to skim through all the comments. Did anyone ever like Jon Katz' articles? A friend kept on pointing him out to me back at Wired, but I could never see the appeal.

Sat 02 Nov | J. D. Trollinger | Recall Sturgeon's Law. When author Theodore Sturgeon was asked about the poor quality of most science fiction, he allegedly replied, 'Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud.'

Sat 02 Nov | Albert D. Kallal | It have to admit, that this kind of anti-ms bashing has become a true problem for some of these boards. In fact, I can recall a post of mine on a board where I was quite surprised at the responses. It was clear that I was a user of MS tools, and majority of the people were not. In fact, I actually received a personal email from the moderator/editor of the board. He actually in a round about way apologized to me. He stated that I should not let the harsh responses directed to me discourage me to participate. I think the moderator was genuinely concerned that new people like me are being discouraged from joining the discussions. I also think the moderator may have thought I am kind of newbe to the net, and might not be aware of how nasty the net can be. (I used BBS systems long before the net was around!!). It was obviously clear to the moderator that a good portion of people who write software, and have something to contribute to the industry do use MS tools. To simply exclude this group of people from technology discussions is a bad idea. I have no beef or flag towards any tool or software platform. In fact, I have software of mine running on Linux platforms in several countries right now. I also use a good many MS products. The difference is that I actually really like some of MS products, and most of the Linux/Unix people I know will not touch the stuff. Does anyone remember the stir when Linus Torvalds's used PowerPoint at a lecture he was giving? He simply stated that PowerPoint is a good tool, and he saw no reason not to use it. Apparently, many of his followers don’t obviously share his ideals. They could learn a lot from Mr. Torvalds. At the end of the day, I want to use great tools, and write great software. One huge failure of MS is its lack of community building. Steve Balmer has commented on this recently. They now realize how important user communities are. Fact is, community building is hugely important (heck..just look at this discussion board!!!). Microsoft has finally started to work on building user communities out there. This is a tremendous and good change on MS’s part. MS for example had not really been serious about newsgroups. They let the un-moderated ones just kind appeared. Some of those newsgroups of course now turned on MS, and they have no control over them. I used the FoxPro user group on CompuServe many years ago (before the net came along). It was just fantastic. Most good companies have and use discussion boards for support. Why in the world MS did not do this is a surprise. MS now has a very good newsgroup hierarchy (micosoft.public.. “whatever”). They also make sure that staff run these things, and they are now becoming a incredible tool for support and learning MS products. The change, and quality of staff participation in these groups is dramatic. This now means that MS has reacted, and is building users communities. This is a sign of a very smart company, and till very recently was a huge mistake on MS’s part. It also means that MS is now much more in touch with the people who use their products. I have often thought that the distance between some developers and the folks in Redmond was too great. Now, MS employees are thrown into the front lines of discussions boards, and they learn real quick what customers are doing, and saying about their products. I don’t know, but suspect that many new employees are required to spend time on these boards now. The other neat deal is people can now get a lot of free support from ms, and not have to pay!! At the end of the day, good companies must now build user communities and use the power of the net to building communities. This also ties in with the lack of effectiveness that marketing and advertising. MS has a huge advertising budget, but it has done nothing to help, or improve the company image in the eyes of consumers. The use of communities is much more effective (Joel just had a link recently on how advertising does not work well). The Auto industry will soon pick up on what MS is doing, and I see them as the next industry that will adopt and use the power of user communities. Albert D. Kallal Edmonton, Alberta Canada Kallal@msn.com

Sun 03 Nov | Ryan Ware | Good post, Albert. I too use Unix/Linux and Microsoft products. I believe in picking a tool based on it's merits, nothing else. It seems a lot of the Unix/Linux people choose there tools more out of a certain philosophical viewpoint as much as anything else. The more I interact with these types of individuals the more I feel they discredit themselves. I also agree with the poster that said something to the effect that the user that noticed how /.'s discussions had changed probably changed himself. Kind of like going into a grade school classroom. 'Man, who fits on these chairs.' At least I notice this in my opinion of slash.

Sun 03 Nov | anon | 'It seems a lot of the Unix/Linux people choose there tools more out of a certain philosophical viewpoint as much as anything else.' You're being uncharitable in claiming this is bad. A recent discussion here was about why it's good to have subscription fees on software, as if people should pay a software tax. Some people don't want to live in that world. Remember, you're living in a nice, responsible society because people already laid down the philosophical groundwork. But clearly it's a difficult situation, and I wish there was a very informed outside observer. I'm very biased too.

Sun 03 Nov | Bill Carlson | Great post, Albert. Excellent points about using the 'best tools for the job'. I don't really understand the blind hatred of Microsoft. Their 'quality bar' may be slightly lower than some people would like, but has this really been a 'bad thing'? If Microsoft had never existed, would we be living in a utopia of Java and XML where software interoperated and never crashed? Maybe. If that were the case, though, would we also have $499 PCs that are functionally accessable to the non-technical masses? Continuity has played a big part in this. For all its warts, MS really has done a good job with backward compatibility over the years. How do you 'have it all' with a product? i.e. appeal to everyone, have a great UI, be infinitely configurable, embrace power users and novices, be robust and secure, support legacy technology, run on old hardware, and have speedy time to market? The answer: you don't. You make tradeoffs. Microsoft has made tradeoffs, often in favor of the non-technical user over the power-user. This is the root of their success. Companies that make other tradeoffs compete in other markets. I wouldn't want Windows XP running my mom's pacemaker, but it works fine for the 'E-Mail and internet' PC that sits on her desk at home. Did I really just type all this? Sorry, Joel, not trying to turn your forum into /.; just that these things get the blood boiling...

Sun 03 Nov | Myron Semack | Try Ars Technica. http://www.arstechnica.com They have a decent selection of forums (Hardware, Windows, Linux, Mac, Programming, etc). All the 'Microsoft Sux Linux RuLeZ' is limited to the Battlefront forum. The moderators do a really good job keeping those threads in their place. The forum is frequented by people who actually know something, as opposed to people who like to get on a soapbox. It's one of the last places left with a good SN ratio.

Sun 03 Nov | Nat Ersoz | Slashdot discussions? Hmmm. The overwhelming majority of written opinion on /. was to legalize child pornography. At least you know where to find them. Its like a voluntary state police registry.

Sun 03 Nov | Albert D. Kallal | >>'It seems a lot of the Unix/Linux people choose there tools more out of a certain philosophical viewpoint as much as anything else.' Aron wrote: You're being uncharitable in claiming this is bad. A recent discussion here was about why it's good to have subscription fees on software, as if people should pay a software tax. Some people don't want to live in that world. I agree with Aron. I have zero problems with people choosing a car, a company, or even the kind of software they use on personal lifestyle ideals. In fact, you can choose the type software based on your religion if you wish. There is not wrong with this. Where the problem becomes is when as a result of those choices the person cannot longer have an intelligent conversation. In my comments about paying to use software, I am not saying that people must do this, I am simply saying that this type of business model is not sustainable. If I tell you that if you don’t eat, and you will get hungry. You cannot then come back to me, and tell me not to preach to people to go on diets!!! That is crazy. I not preaching, or telling people how they should eat. I am not preaching that these people should go on a diet. I am simply saying that if don't don’t eat, you will go hungry. (and by the way, there is no big “moral” wrong in someone telling people to go on a diet anyway!!). People are entilted to think, and even yes, tell pepole to eat lots of food and get fat! Hence, on my comments about paying to using software, I am simply telling the consequences of this. I did not say that people must pay to use software. I most certainly did say that it is a no brainer that if the company has no money coming in to support a product..they cannot suport it! (people unfortunately do have to eat!!!). There is no software company in the world that can be sustained without some pay for use, or that product cannot be supported (or it will have a limited life span, and for some people that limited use is ok too!). If you want to use software, and not pay a “use” cost, then you are free to make that choice. Just don’t cry when in 5 years no one is around to support that software. Be aware of the results of the choices that one makes. In many cases, the consequences of that company not supporting the software is very small, and no big deal. Hence, if you don’t want to pay to use, and are willing to live with that risk…then that is fine. But no one can tell me that the risk does not exist (it exits in both business models by the way..). Read my last post in that thread paying to use software. Again, my problem with the /. People is that I can freely make choices, and use MS products, or Linux products. They are not willing to use, or cannot use a MS product. In fact, up to that point, I actually have no beef with the /. crowd. Thus, I can even understand their position. Fine!,…no problem at this point!! However, when you can’t have a reasoned conversation as a result of these choices…then I have great fault. That is the big difference we are talking about here. Albert D. Kallal Edmonton, Alberta Canada Kallal@msn.com

Most powerful notebook? | Thu 31 Oct | Yaniv

I am looking to buy a really high end notebook. The best one available there. I want something to replace my desktop, to do all my development work. I am looking into notebooks from Alienware, Sager, Pro-star. Size, Weight, Price are no obligation. Are they worth thier money? Do any of you have any one of those? What kind of notebooks do you guys use? Thanks in advance for your reply.

Thu 31 Oct | Cartman | I use a Trapper Keeper. The most powerfull.

Fri 01 Nov | JWA | I custom ordered an HP ze series a few months ago, and I couldn't be happier with it. P4 .4 desktop processor, 1 gig DDR ram, 60 gig drive, 15.1' SXGA+ screen, DVD/CD-r, etc. I use it for all of my dev work. For the year before this I used a HP laptop with the 15.1'SXGA+ screen. I think that's the best screen possible. With the digital inpts it's way better than desktop flat panels, and the usual flat panels need to be 17' to get 1280x1024. At that size you have to move it away from you to the point that youre back at the effective res. of 1024 or so. I've been really happy with both of my high-end HP laptops, as have the guys from my former employer. The only thing that I wish it had was USB 2.0 ports built in. Most of the other manufacturers are making these desktop replacement laptops with the full desktop processors and available high res screens too, but I'd reccomend looking into customizing an HP. All built up you'll be looking at $2,500 or so. Good luck, and enjoy it! --JWA

Fri 01 Nov | happy with laptop (sir) | Sony PCG-GRX570... Huge 16' monitor, nice big keyboard, barely portable (just too darn big and heavy). Had it for months, no problems.

Fri 01 Nov | David Neale | Dell Insprion 8200 with Enhanced ASV UXGA screen (1600x1200). I was upset when I saw the sony the day after ordering this but after seeing both and comparing I am happy with my choice because:- 1) Dell has 15.1' screen, is a bit thick but I can take it around with me without major problems. 2) Dell has better keyboard, decent layout and key travel. 3) It can take a mini-pci wireless ethernet card (I got one off eBay) without having anything sticking out of the pcmcia slots at the side. 3) You can have 2 batteries AND the DVD drive, with the sony (the one I saw anyway) you have to lose the DVD to have the second battery. 4) pointy stick and trackpad - you can set the pointy stick to work like a scroll wheel (horiz & vert), great for scrolling in visual studio. 5) Geforce4 (or Radeon 9000 now I think) graphics. 6) Can take 12.5mm or 9mm hard drives, though I seriously recommend the 40GNX 5400rpm 8Mb cache IBM series, it's just so faaaast, great for compiling etc. Downsides:- 1) RJ45 is on the left not the back. 2) PCMCIA slots have these stupid dummy cards instead of sprung flaps like every other make, I keep a compact flash adapter in one which helps. 3) Power supply seems heavier than it needs to be, compared to other makes. 4) erm... thats it, I'd buy the same again if something happened to it (though I'd look at the sony's again to make sure). David.

Fri 01 Nov | anonQAguy | I second the Dell Inspiron 8200 choice. recently got one pretty fully outfitted pretty much as described earlier, including burner, dvd, etc. The display is awesome, especially if you get their top-end display. It's brighter and has a wider viewing angle in addition to being able to handle very high resolution levels (got a 64mb video card in it). Ergonomics appears good as well. Opted for the built-in modem (just in case) and nic, so I wouldn't burn up a pcmcia slot for either of those (now non-optional) devices. It's correct, though, that the network connection on the front left is, IMO, a mistake. Should have been in the rear someplace. I also got a laptop backpack with it (also from Dell), as opposed to ordering the more conventional laptop case -- IMO a very good choice for transporting it around. The backpack is big enough you can use the extra space as an overnight bag if you have a short trip to make as well. Of course the downside of that is you pulling your laptop out at the client site from amongst your underwear, so you may want to be a little circumspect about letting the client see the inside of your 'laptop' case, especially if it's by then full of dirty laundry ;-). Personally, I made a decision to avoid buying anymore HP products (not trying to start a flame war here) due to some just remarkably stupid, horrible, and costly support problems I had a while back on an HP printer. They pissed me off so badly, that my only revenge is to not willingly give them any more of my business. I realize, though that YMMV, but FWIW that's one reason I've gone with Dell.

Fri 01 Nov | Yaniv | I have seen the Dells, HPs, SONYs etc. But have you guys taken a look at the machines from Alienware, Sager or Pro-star. If you don't mind the weight, they look great! They look like killer machines! P4, 2.8GHz, 1GB RAM, 60GB Hard drive etc. But they are real bulky, which is okay by me. Does anybody have any experience with one of those? Thanks.

Fri 01 Nov | Rhys Weekley | I can't recommend IBM Thinkpads highly enough. I've used a T23 for the last year or so for all my development work (and everything else, including video). Best hardware purchase I've made. 1.13GHz, 1GB RAM, 48GB HDD, DVD/CD-RW, 1400 x 1050 14.1' display, wireless, etc. It's good enough for everything I do (except gaming), and the keyboard is fantastic. The newer models are Pentium 4s and probably have 3D cards. One tip: If you want genuine portability, get a 14.1' screen. I carry my machine around in a small backpack. I can get it into carry-on luggage with all my clothes when I go somewhere for a weekend. I couldn't do that with the larger models (e.g. the A series). The larger ones tend to be more powerful and have better video options, but you'll definitely get *enough* power with the smaller machine if you configure it right, and you'll thank yourself when you need to carry the thing around.

Fri 01 Nov | NathanJ | >> Personally, I made a decision to avoid buying anymore HP products (not trying to start a flame war here) due to some just remarkably stupid, horrible, and costly support problems I had a while back on an HP printer. They pissed me off so badly, that my only revenge is to not willingly give them any more of my business. I realize, though that YMMV, but FWIW that's one reason I've gone with Dell. << I made the same decision about Dell due to a problem I had about 10 years ago. I wonder how many digruntled customers actually cancel each other out? Anyway... I also saw somebody post about getting a P4.4 desktop processor in their laptop. How does that work as far as heat? I currently have a Toshiba with a desktop processor inside. Sometimes it overheats and shuts off even if I'm just typing a text document. Some day when I can do without the laptop for a few days I'll take it back to get it fixed. I used to have an IBM Thinkpad. I never had problems with that other than the heavy weight. When my current laptop gets too obsolete I'll probably go for a high-end, but not cutting edge machine with good durability and reliability.

Fri 01 Nov | chris | I use an IBM Thinkpad A series. Rock solid and quick. I had to call support once and they were very helpful and courteous. I always thought I would prefer the touchpad, but after using it for a while the eraser head is very efficient. You don't have to move you have very far to get to it and it is more accurate than the touchpad. It's heavy, but then again I'm not backpacking with it either. I guess if you're commuting a lot on public transport or walking to work, that might be a factor. I occasionally dock it if I'm going to do graphics work and need a better monitor, but for the most part it has everything I need. Highly recommended.

Fri 01 Nov | Nat Ersoz | I have a brand spanking new Dell Inspiron 8200 also. My previous i7500 was stolen from my car last month :(. But, my homeowners policy helped my get this new beautious monster with the immaculate screen. The display is truly excellent. I love the keyboard layout and feel - its an improvement over the 7500, which was pretty good to begin with. I had sent the i7500 back to Dell 4 times for warranty repair in its 3 year life. It had just come back from a warranty trip just before it was stolen. I've seen all brands of laptops break in various ways: screens snapping off, pixels flickering, keyboards cracking, PCMCIA slots crunching... So I think with laptops its not a matter of if they break as much as when. Dell's warranty service is very good, IMO. A guy shows up from Airborne with a box, you put it in a box and you'll get it back in about 3 days. It hard to imagine better service from a local repair shop. One time it came back the next day with a new screen. That was pretty phenomenal. Dell's standard warranty is 3 years and can be renewed. I would not upgrade beyond the mail in service. This laptop runs Redhat 8.0, and as far as I have owned it, has never seen the XP boot screen. I intend to resell the mandatory MSFT software on eBay. The RH8 install was flawless.

Fri 01 Nov | Stephen Jones | One problem I have with programming after dark with a laptop is that the different colors of the comments (green), and colde (black or blue) is very difficult to see from most angles. The laptop is a brand new HP Omnibook 6200 with a 15' 1400 x1050 screen, so I don't think the problem lies with the brand. Of course if I was a real programmer, as opposed to somebody studying books for a hobby, then I wouldn't need these wimpy colours anyway :) Steve

Fri 01 Nov | anon | Are you a consumer or a technical user, as far as this notebook goes? As a technical user, you usually don't care about 2% speed differences because stability dominates completely, especially when you can't tinker with internals. I don't trust Dell Inspirons anymore, I've heard too many problems with the stability of their monitor joints. I had a DOA, and got a good replacement whose only problem was one dead pixel, back when those were common. I sold it to a friend and it still works fast. Took a lot of abuse in my care. Very good tech support. Sony is ok. It's a fine consumer machine. My NV was fairly cheap and has only USB mouse problems with sleep mode. So I deactivated sleep mode. Also, I don't necessarily trust their driver support, it didn't exist for a month for my model. I really wanted an IBM, but I had to get a notebook quick in Germany. (God damn the german keyboard layout.) I suggest IBM thinkpads. I've never owned one, but I've used them. I'll be able to talk about their warts intelligently once I get my next notebook. I guess we're not talking about Apples, just oranges...

Fri 01 Nov | Prakash S | Check this out. http://www.dell.com/us/en/dhs/products/model_inspn_1_inspn_8200.htm I have been using a 2500 Dell Inspiron for more than a year. No complaints. Very good laptop, I haul it around in my backpack, use it very roughly, and there are no problems. The only thing I have noticed is marks/ spots on my screen. Do you guys also have this problem? What do you do about it?

Fri 01 Nov | Peter Ibbotson | One thing to watch out for if you buy something with 802.11b builtin, Mine came with a orinoco silver mini-PCI card which can't do 128 bit encryption. Check this before you buy.

Fri 01 Nov | anonQAguy | Nathan J { LOL! Excellent point about disgruntled users cancelling each other out! My position is that my HP experience is a single datapoint in the grand scheme of things. It was significant to me, but it may be an outlier to the market overall. None of these companies is perfect, certainly. Guess if enough customers 'vote with their feet' from one vendor over to others, the market will figure out whether it's significant or not. Hence my inclusion of the 'YMMV', because it really does. } Heard very good things about ThinkPads also. All our developers at work use ThinkPads, I believe, and one visual designer. There used to be a saying, back in the PS-2 days (dating myself here), that ' Nobody ever got fired for buying IBMs.' It was referring to corporate IT purchasers back in the early 90s when computer vendors came and went like dot.com's did some years later. Rest are on Dell Inspirons. Prakash { I have experienced both dead pixels on a 1999 Gateway laptop I still use at home for email, and in the last year (out of the 3-yr warranty, unfortunately), I lost about 15-20% of the screen - it just pukes out random static. It's a problem with the LCD itself because video output to an external monitor is fine. So in my experience, I've had LCD problems with one machine, a Gateway, but only after several years' use and a fair number of miles of travel and abuse. } Overall, I don't think you'll go far wrong if you stick with one of the major vendors that has the features & support you want.

Fri 01 Nov | anonymous | I've been happy w/ my Compaq Presario lappy. (I've had it for a little more than a year.) My next will be that sweet, green Alienware lappy tho. They use desktop-class CPUs and the best graphics processor on the market.

Fri 01 Nov | pb | I've never tried a notebook that's key-board would be satisfactory for 4-10 hour/day usage.

Fri 01 Nov | S. M. | I use a Dell Inspiron 7500 Notebook and I have no problems typing and using its touchpad for 6-10 hours per day. I even prefer its keyboard to classic keyboards.

Sat 02 Nov | Troy King | The secret truth about who makes laptops: http://www.mindconnection.com/library/computertips/whomakeslaptops.htm

Sat 02 Nov | ns | I second ThinkPad recommendation. I used to have a very stylish Sony (man was that screen beautiful), but found it to be too flimsy. If you're going to be hammering out code for hours at a time, do yourself a favor and get something as rugged as a ThinkPad. They have thought of everything too. There's a white-LED downlight to illuminate the keyboard at night. The keyboard is well designed: there are finger indentations to help you find the arrow keys without looking; the F-keys and cursor-control keys are spaced exactly as on a real keyboard; the 'Windows' and 'context menu' keys are gone, allowing for full-size Ctrl and Alt keys. Screen dimming and volume control are hardware functions and work even if you don't load the provided utility software. The screen is solidly connected and won't bounce as you type. I could go on and on but basically, they've got a very well designed, if ugly, notebook.

Sat 02 Nov | anon | Oh yes, Sony Vaios are too dependent on software for things like brightness controls. So no luck if you wish to run Linux unless there's a patch out there, or you write one.

Sun 03 Nov | James Ussher-Smith | I have a Sony Vaio PCG-GRX316MP and I can't recommend it enough - it is fantastic! PIV 1.6GHz, 30GB, 256MB ram (though I am upgrading this), 16' screen. It does have a few minor inconveniences for me (no built in Wireless LAN, so I have to have a PCMCIA one with an ugly arial, no built in floppy drive, have to remove the DVD/CDRW to use the second battery, etc) but overall I highly recommend it. It's a little old now, they have released a few updated versions (mine was purchased in May).

Sun 03 Nov | Nat Ersoz | 'A little old' - purchased in May??!! Hell, my 3 year old i7500 had at least another 2 years left on it, before it got stole from mah truck. An' mah truck at 140K miles still got another hunnert thow or more left on it. Kids these days.

Sun 03 Nov | Prakash S | 'Kids these days. ' we are early adopters of technolgy Nat :-)

Quality of Professors / Graduate Students | Wed 30 Oct | Anon for Obvious Reasons

Without egotism, let me put forth that I am an above average software engineer. Or at least I am good enough to be paid six figures after round after round of layoffs in *this* economy. I claim no more than being above average. Anyway, 49% of software engineers are in the same category as I - above average. Have any of you gone back to grad school? Have any of you been subjected to professors (and/or graduate students) with an obvious lack of practical technical skills or ability? I find it utterly fascinating that people who have never actually produced an enterprise software solution are in charge of instructing and rating our future developers! Quite literally, these deficients often distribute code with their homegrown linked lists, trees & hash tables. (Mind you, they are not distributing code with sophisticated, cutting-edge algorithms - just run-of-the-mill, amateurish data structures that are mostly less efficient than STL templates.) Have you ever been graded by an idiot who just cant grasp SQL, but who somehow passed a graduate level Database course, and is now knowledgeable enough to grade a professional data modeler? I believe this is a serious problem. Maybe this problem has been around for decades! (Are there any mechanical, electrical, chemical. etc. engineers who have experienced the same thing?) Any thoughts anyone?

Wed 30 Oct | Robert Anderson | Your first mistake is thinking that graduate school is the appropriate place for developing 'practical technical skills.' It's not. I hope you weren't banking on that. Your second mistake, I'm assuming, is assuming that one graduate program is a lot like the next. Graduate programs are *vastly* different between schools in what is taught, how it is taught, who teaches it, and how well it is taught. I hope you researched your decision carefully. Finally, I will sympathize with the statement 'those that can't do, teach.' It's a half-truth in the sense that there are some who choose academics for high-road reasons, and they tend to be quite good at either teaching or research, and in rare cases, both. But there are also those who ended up in academics because they had traits which more or less blocked them from, shall we say, more lucrative pursuits. These people tend to be crummy in all respects, and limp through their academic careers, inflicting pain on students along the way. My advice: If you wanted to develop 'practical technical skills' for their own sake - get out now. If you wanted to pad your resume with an MS and are sure it will buy you something - suck it up and tough it out. If you entered into this with a genuine interest in academic pursuits, you need to re-align your expectations with reality. I guess the only way to do that is to talk to lots of people both at your school and others. Bob

Thu 31 Oct | Anonymous Coward | Recent research suggests that getting an MBA won't really help your career in the long-run: http://www.business2.com/articles/mag/0,1640,41346,FF.html I suspect that software engineering is the same. Why go to grad school, if you already have a decent job?

Thu 31 Oct | steve b | The idea that universities are at the top of a hierarchy is out of date. As a software developer, you would do much more software development than a lecturer / professor, and if you're intelligent, you would be better at it too. Also, remember that most teaching jobs don't pay as well as development jobs, so in many cases the best people aren't taking the jobs in universities. Not all, of course. But it has an effect. Maybe top software houses should issue credentials. And I suppose that's what resumes are, in a way.

Thu 31 Oct | Ed the Millwright | Universities are seriously behind the times and I don't see that as changing any time soon. A bachelors from a reputable university is fine for getting your foot in the door someplace, but there is no point getting anything above that, unless for some reason the bachelors program you took was especially miserable and their PhD or MS program is the same as a bachelors from a reputable university. When you see a candidate with a MSCS or PHD, you have to wonder what is wrong with them. They couldn't find work? They didn't want to work? Who knows. Usually, people with advanced CS degrees are not fit to code. In a related subject, it seems to me that a MS or PhD from an Indian university is about equivalent to a 2-year degree over here. Anyone else notice this?

Thu 31 Oct | Robert Anderson | <> I would point out that the type of education that a graduate program is supposed to give, by all accounts, is almost entirely orthogonal to 'producing enterprise software solutions.' And if a graduate program *did* claim to be teaching that? Run the other direction. Bob

Thu 31 Oct | Nat Ersoz | I agree completely that 'enterprise application development' has little bearing on a CS graduate degree. So, what would be the pillars of a rigorous graduate program in CS? 1. Machine Architecture. 2. Compilers and Languages. 3. Operating Systems. 4. Graphics: transforms and optimization. 5. Crypto and security. 6. Artificial Intelligence. What other topics should go up there? My experience with MSCS degrees or above is pretty much at odds with most of what a saw written here. Additionally, I found working toward my MSEE was very challenging. I'd suggest you switch to a school that is more than just a diploma mill.

Thu 31 Oct | Frederik Slijkerman | 'Anyway, 49% of software engineers are in the same category as I - above average.' Not necessarily. For example, suppose that out of every 100 programmers there are 50 who score a 3 (on a scale from 1 to 10), 30 who score a 4, and 20 who score an 8. The average score is 4.3, so only 20% of the programmers is above average here.

Thu 31 Oct | Ed | Nat, All the things you mentioned are covered in depth in any BS program worth its salt. I agree with you about the MSEE -- my comments only apply to CS degrees.

Thu 31 Oct | Ged Byrne | MSEE?

Thu 31 Oct | | 'Usually, people with advanced CS degrees are not fit to code' Post your proof.

Thu 31 Oct | ya think? | Universities are crap, most 'professionals' in any given field are crap. Even the best of us are crap from time to time. What's new?

Thu 31 Oct | Not Anon? | Maybe you should have gone to a better school? Also, don't forget that you are studying computer _science_. Not computer _programming_. Computer science is to programming as maths is to engineering. Computer science is Donald Knuth and Edsger Dijkstra, not Bruce Eckel and Jesse Liberty.

Thu 31 Oct | amp | An MBA is the best way for me to get a job in corp. finance.

Thu 31 Oct | Nat Ersoz | MSEE: MS Electrical Engineering.

Thu 31 Oct | Nat Ersoz | Well, just as solid state physics and electric & magnietic fields were covered in my BSEE, the MSEE took it to a quantitatively different level. I'd expect the same would be true of MSCS.

Thu 31 Oct | Ricardo Antunes da Costa | The best thing to do is to join the two worlds. I worked as intern when was taking my BSCS, and I am working now, while taking my MSCS. A degree will give you the foundation, where you can build your career. And you build it with hard work, and the experience that you´ll get over the years. It´s all about that thing of being expertise after ten years. You don´t leave college being a top notch coder, if you don´t code. You learn it by doing it. And it´s up to you.

Thu 31 Oct | Brent P. Newhall | There are other reasons to get a Master's degree, besides getting a higher salary: 1. If you want to teach at a college level, you have to get a Master's. 2. A Master's environment should provide a unique learning environment that can educate in a way that no other educational system can, even home study. For example, my local university provides a Master's in Computer Science with a focus on Artificial Intelligence, which guides you through a wide variety of AI topics. And this is done with people who devote their lives to AI research.

Thu 31 Oct | David Clayworth | Universities are doing some of the best computer science in the world, but it's in the cutting edge fields - A.I., speech recognition, alternative computing models, robotics, not programming techniques. Microsoft thinks enough of academics to found a research institute at Cambridge UK specifically to make use of the academics.

Thu 31 Oct | mackinac | This is an interesting topic to me since I have been thinking about getting an MSEE. One of the local universities has a program with evening and weekend classes to accomodate working students. The courses also tend to be of a practical nature and are often taught by instructors from local industry. Due to what I see as rather dim prospects for software development to evolve into a worthwhile career in the next couple of decades, I am considering a shift to something a little more technical. I would be interested in hearing any comments from the MSEEs on this discussion. Engineering work is fairly low in the business hierarchy and an EE oriented job may be no better than CS, but I'd like to get some input.

Thu 31 Oct | Nat Ersoz | mackinac, Here are some of the 'pillars' of the EE trade: 1. Solid state. 2. Electromagnetic fields. 3. Communication Systems. 4. Computing & digital logic. 5. Lumped Elements (passive circuits). As you won't find 'enterprise application design' in the MSCS course catalog, you likely won't find 'Designing with VHDL/Verilog' in the EE course catalog. Actually, you might, but it wouldn't be a 'core course'. But, designing with VHDL/Verilog is what employers are looking for in a digital hardware design candidate these days. Verilog and VHDL (equivalent modlling languages) are the C/C++ of hardware design. There are othe direct applications to EE grad courses. Examples: You (very likely) wouldn't write good DSP code without the comm sys course work. You wouldn't be designing advanced antennas without the E&M course work. But for a large part of ASIC design, the course work has only indirect application - mostly based on the target application. Clear as mud, right? I think the key is that you have a passion for the raw material and you'll find the applications as necessary.

Thu 31 Oct | Steve | <> Any reason/experinece that would lead you making this statement?.

Thu 31 Oct | Jason | I always thought that my school could do itself a huge favor by not admitting anyone to its grad program unless they had spent at least 2 years working professionally after they finished their BS. Same idea for Phd's, too.

Thu 31 Oct | Justin Johnson | I'm in my MSCS right now, as a counterbalance to my daily work experience. The academic side is very nicely complementing the practical stuff I do every day, and I've started to think it's a necessary complement to avoid becoming a code janitor. Make no mistake: just as there are academics who don't know things that real coders know, there are things that academics know that people with purely practical experience never learn. How many people understand the real performance characteristics of btrees from reading websites? That said, I'm taking an excellent class right now in Data Structures & Algorithms from a woman who's coded professionally for twenty years, and who came back in the evenings to teach expressly to improve the quality of programming taught at school. She's the most knowledgeable programmer I've ever met, especially compared to the guys at my employer's parent company who designed and built the ERP we're using. She's adamant about good coding practices, and a wealth of knowledge about the practice. So, slagging academics in general is useless. Like everything else, it comes down to the circumstances. Get with good people, and you'll be better; get stuck with bad people, and you'll be worse.

Thu 31 Oct | Chris Tavares | >>>When you see a candidate with a MSCS or PHD, you have to wonder what is wrong with them. They couldn't find work? They didn't want to work? Who knows. Usually, people with advanced CS degrees are not fit to code.<<< I find that statement rather offensive. I have 12 years of professional development experience, 10 years of hobby experience before that, I regularly teach and mentor other people on software development and engineering, AND I have an MSCS. Why get the Masters? If your employer has a tuition reimbursement program, why in the world would you *not* get it? It can open doors that would be closed to you otherwise, gives you the chance to see out from behind the cubicle walls and the VB6 forms into some of the larger areas of the industry, meet lots of peers you wouldn't have had a chance to otherwise, and maybe, just maybe, you might actually learn something.

Thu 31 Oct | optional | 'When you see a candidate with a MSCS or PHD, you have to wonder what is wrong with them.' Ya, I can see it now: I'm sorry mister Torvalds, you don't have what it takes to be a code monkey in our org.

Thu 31 Oct | steve b | David Clayworth, there are many companies doing cutting edge research in A.I., speech recognition, alternative computing models and robotics. Why do you think non-university research is restricted to 'programming techniques?' You yourself mention Microsoft, which has a ginormous research facility, quite apart from the development in its business units.

Thu 31 Oct | Tim Lara | Nat (or any other MSEE'd readers) - Please forgive my ignorance on the field of EE, but it seems like I see a lot of debates regarding whether a MSCS or MSEE background is preferable as the foundation for becoming a high quality programmer. As an EE, do you feel that the coursework you completed had value with respect to becoming a better programmer in general (improved your logical and problem solving skills, made you more able to make good design and organizational decisions, etc) or would you say that the EE field is actually highly specialized and probably overkill for someone who just wants to open some doors and grow as a developer? In other words, if I am interested in writing really high quality business/productivity software but I'm happy to let someone else invent the next great breakthrough in wireless networking technology, would I be correct in assuming that an MSEE probably isn't the path for me? If not, what is? A natural aptitude and several years of practical, real-world development experience (hobbyist and professional) has gotten me surprisingly far in my programming career at this point, but of course I'd be lying if I said that there have not been plenty of appealing job postings I've shied away due to my college dropout inferiority complex. (Back then, I was an English major - go figure! Maybe I should just try writing a novel instead.)

Thu 31 Oct | Andrew Reid | >>An MBA is the best way for me to get a job in corp. finance. Reason enough in itself for not doing one, IMO :)

Thu 31 Oct | David Fischer | There are a lot of false canards being tossed around here, sadly. I can't speak to CS programs specifically, but I recently finished my Ph.D. in another branch of science so I speak in some generality. The worst notion thrown around here is that a person's salary indicates their ability and worth as a technologist. Not everyone holds net worth as their driving ambition. Many teach because they love to teach; that they make less than if they worked says nothing about their skills or abilities. Others go into academic research for the freedoms it provides gives to pursue their research interests, compared to working for a company; their salary has no correlation to their ability as a researcher. A lesser evil is the old lie that 'those who can't, teach.' If you've every tried to teach something then you understand that in truth it's generally those who can do something really well that are best able to teach it. If you don't understand something well enough to do it, then you're generally even less able to teach it. Likewise the notion that professors are those students too incompetent to get a 'real' job is a silly stereotype. The job market for academics is extremely tight and competitive. For those people, industry jobs are what you take if you're aren't up to a University's standards. In other words: some would say that those with 'real' jobs are the ones too simple-minded to become Professors. (which is, off course, just as foolishly bigoted.) And many science and engineering professors have solid industrial experience, through freelance consulting, starting their own companies, or working before becoming professors. There are good and bad, skilled and unskilled people in all jobs, be it academics or industry. No need to overly generalize because of one pinhead professor. Or maybe you're right. But then all industry people are crooks and incompetents (as seen by Enron, Xerox, Arther Andersen, etc.)

Thu 31 Oct | Robert Anderson | << There are a lot of false canards being tossed around here, sadly. I can't speak to CS programs specifically, but I recently finished my Ph.D. in another branch of science so I speak in some generality. >> Keyword: recently. Wait until you've had some experience outside the University system. Your opinion will gain further shades. << The worst notion thrown around here is that a person's salary indicates their ability and worth as a technologist. ...> I saw almost none of this save a few inane comments. I think the point is more that the salary difference draws away a lot of talented people who might have otherwise been terrific academics, leaving more room for those who are not so terrific. << A lesser evil is the old lie that 'those who can't, teach.' If you've every tried to teach something then you understand that in truth it's generally those who can do something really well that are best able to teach it. If you don't understand something well enough to do it, then you're generally even less able to teach it. >> The second and third sentences are true, IMO. But in order to draw the conclusion that professors are really good at doing, you'd first have to assume that they are good at teaching. Eh. The second problem with this is that the 'something' matters. The 'something' that professors teach is not really what industry requires of the do-ers, so to speak. << Likewise the notion that professors are those students too incompetent to get a 'real' job is a silly stereotype. The job market for academics is extremely tight and competitive. For those people, industry jobs are what you take if you're aren't up to a University's standards. In other words: some would say that those with 'real' jobs are the ones too simple-minded to become Professors. (which is, off course, just as foolishly bigoted.) >> I personally know several internationally recognized academics who will tell you point blank that if they could compete and do well in the business world, they would do it in a heartbeat and stop screwing around with 1/3 of the pay on problems that only a few people in the world care about. But they can't, so they do what they can compete in. Others, of course, want no part of it. << And many science and engineering professors have solid industrial experience, through freelance consulting, starting their own companies, or working before becoming professors. >> And these people do tend to be good, IMO. Anyone who does this must have passion for teaching, otherwise they would take the other leg out and never look back. << Or maybe you're right. But then all industry people are crooks and incompetents (as seen by Enron, Xerox, Arther Andersen, etc.) >> No. But a good portion of them are. Bob

Fri 01 Nov | WhatTimeIsItEccles | This is a topic that I can speak about. After ten years of working in development, I went back to university to do a BSc in Computer Science. The reasons for doing so are unimportant, but it was not to improve my skills as such. The quality of the lecturing was infinitely variable. Many of my lecturers had never set foot outside of academia, and it showed. Many were openly dismissive of work in the outside world 'just COBOL hacking' they said. I went to a number of lectures where the lecturer would talk about how things were done in 'real world' when in fact he was talking complete bollocks. After the lecture I usually had words with them to point out their errors. I had the advantage of being older than most of the lecturers and they knew that I had real world experience so they didn't argue. I did have some magnificent lecturers, one was an ex-practitioner like me, who held many of the same views as me about ivory towers etc. Some were just so impressive in their knowledge that they took my breath away, the problems only seemed to arise when they tried to related to the outside world of computers. What I learned did not really help me with my work, except maybe a re-inforced belief in doing things properly and the correctness of code. Some of the things I learned I would love to put into practise (Z anyone ?) but for the most part is unrealistic given constraints of time and money in commercial organisations. One very sad event happened when I was there, a lecturer (who was also my tutor) taught graphics. Over the last few years he had a problem, many of the undergraduates already had many years of coding behind them and many were already highly skilled in graphics from writing demos and games. The lecturer found that he was being corrected by the students and being introduced to new techniques that he did not know about. He had a nervous breakdown. A really lovely guy. I think this happens if you lecture in an area which is 'sexy'. I am currently unemployed and I am considering doing an MSc next year for two reasons: 1. To get out of the job market for a year. 2. To add a new skill, I am fascinated by DSP and would love to learn about it properly. The fact that it may improve my employability is a secondary concern. Jonathan

Fri 01 Nov | Bella | you sure are CLUELESS for someone who claims to above average. Here is a simple lesson on natural selection. Anyone who knew ANYTHING was out making $150/hr for the past decade. Who do you think would be left to teach college for minimum wage? The bottom of the barrel. If this surprises you, I am shocked that you have ever been able to compile a line of code, let alone tie your shoelaces.

Fri 01 Nov | lct | 'Anyone who knew ANYTHING was out making $150/hr for the past decade. ' Back it up, troll boy.

Fri 01 Nov | optional | Ya, I can see it now: 'You know that Knuth guy?' 'He was CLUELESS cause he wasn't pulling 150/hr'.

Sat 02 Nov | David Fischer | <> I've got some small industrial experience now. My Ph.D. didn't prepare me to prepare cost estimates or schedule meetings in Lotus Notes. Nor did I learn all the details of how things are done industrially in my sector. Rather, it gave me some specific skill sets, a deeper grounding in fundamentals than you'd ever get with a B.S., and taught me how better to analyze, understand, and solve difficult problems. <> My experience is that it's not the money but the heavy workload that pushes people away from academia. The first five years or so, trying to get tenure at a research university, are extremely difficult. The money situation doesn't help, but people don't get Ph.D's for the cash. If you want cash, you get an M.S., MBA, J.D., or M.D. A Ph.D. can be very lucrative but it's not obvious that it's big money they way e.g. corporate law can be. <<...you'd first have to assume that they are good at teaching. Eh.>> I've had my share of horrendous lecturers (though I've found some horrible lecturers are fantastic one on one). <> I personally think this is a problem with industry. If they want people trained in how to do their specific business, they should hire people from trade schools. But if they want to think long term, and get people with deep knowledge and the skills to tackle hard problems and hopefully bring fresh insights, they need to hire those with broader educations. <<...internationally recognized academics who will tell you point blank that if they could compete and do well in the business world, they would do it in a heartbeat...>> I've not met these people (and I know some very sharp folks) But I suppose there are some. There are still areas of academia where you can take the time to really grapple with hard problems and work out the answers. It would be a hard switch from that to the zero-thinking time corporate America seems to require (at times). A post-graduate degree is neither a silver bullet nor a sign of incompetence. I've found to be as much a calling as a professional choice. And personally, I think a Ph.D. is a pretty spiffy thing to acheive :)

Sat 02 Nov | Tom Payne | I'm writing up my PhD at the mo (in finance), I'm at a decent UK university. I did a BA in Computer Science and an MSc in AI before. Many different types of people start PhDs. In my mind there are three distinct categories: 1. The Academics, Many of my friends are very intelligent and have a deep interest in (love of?) their subjects. They accept that they're not going to earn huge salaries as academics, but this isn't important to them. They do Good Stuff. 2. The CV-pointer. Some people are in it just for the prestige of the three letters. They typically produce sufficient but unremarkable theses. 3. The Drifters. These are people who started PhDs because it was easy to get onto a programme and nothing else sufficiently interesting jumped out in front of them. Doing a PhD was the 'default option' and they produce theses late or drop out. I reckon 20% are Academics, 5% CV-pointers, and the vast majority (75%) are Drifters. I'm a Drifter. This has an obvious effect on the quality of graduates -- very few have actually genuinely been stretching their brains for three or four years! So sadly, as a PhD student, I agree with the original poster -- PhD students aren't anything special, and certainly would have learned a lot more in three years of doing something else. PhDs were, of course, designed to set people up for academic careers: if you've done a PhD then you're supposed to have a good knowledge of your subject, have contributed something new to it, and most importantly be able to assess the quality of other people's work. They're supposed to teach you how to do research. With non-academic sectors having placed value upon the PhD programme (it looks good to be Dr X you're a consultant, for example), PhD programmes, and the students who take them, have lost focus trying to cater to all. It is very similar to what has happened with undergraduate degree programmes: good academics are those who understand and can extend the theory, industry requires people who can deliver practical results. In a limited time a compromise must be struck, which invariably satisfies neither side.

Sun 03 Nov | Bill Carlson | One of the problems with advanced degrees is that there is more supply of academic knowledge than demand. Sure, there are hundreds of 'CompSci' problems that are solved every day: Google searches, compiler writers, SQL engine experts, etc. However, this number is likely dwarfed by the boring 'enterprise app' work that most of us do. Where does this unused capacity go? Too often, the sad answer is that software is made needlessly complex by individuals looking for a 'creative outlet'. For example, a custom hashtable might be somewhat more efficient, but using the default STL implementation costs less, both up front, and in maintanence dollars. I have quite a lot of sympathy for the brilliant, introverted engineer. Perhaps no one really understands her ideas, perhaps those ideas are overkill for the project. If I was a ditch digger, I would be constantly looking for ways to build a better ditch. The problem is, ditch digging is solved; you just need to dig and find a way to be happy doing it. Enterprise software development is kind of like that for these people. IMO, there is a drastic undersupply of people who understand software engineering as a business and who can adeptly balance costs vs. benefits on a projects. This skill is not identified by letters after one's name. Bless the academics, but let them take out their needs for complexity on someone else's project...

Sun 03 Nov | Nat Ersoz | 1. My understanding is that the algorithms inside STL were written by PhD's at SGI. It is rare for anyone to improve upon these algorithm's performance. 2. I takes dedicated effort to simplify software. The explosion of the alphabet soup within this industry, I think, is due to average people claiming 'greatness' (great - an overused term at MSFT, only exceeded by the word 'technology'). The Rube-Goldberg monstrosities of today are the result of not enough attention to detail and a rush to be first in the market. Its all well and good - it is what it is. But the place for academics to add value is in simplification and reduction, not complexity.

Aren't you making Mistake Number 4, Joel? | Wed 30 Oct | Mr Jack

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000017.html Mistake number 4 describes the running out of upgrade revenue problem. It also seems to strongly advocate selling one year licenses for software. Yet both CityDesk and FogBugz are sold on a traditional model. Why is this, Joel? Why not sell one year licenses instead?

Wed 30 Oct | programmer | I think Joel answers your question in the same passage where he 'advocates' one-year site licenses: 'Once people got used to the idea that you 'own' the software that you bought, and you don't have to upgrade if you don't want the new features, that can be a big problem for the software company which is trying to sell a product that is already feature complete.' I don't think Joel's point is that software companies should always adopt a one-year-license scheme -- rather, his point is that they should adopt a one-year-license scheme whenever their customers can be persuaded to accept such a scheme.

Wed 30 Oct | njkayaker | The full quote. The trouble is that with packaged software like Microsoft's, customers won't fall for it. Microsoft has been trying to get their customers to accept subscription-based software since the early 90's, and they get massive pushback from their customers every single time. Once people got used to the idea that you 'own' the software that you bought, and you don't have to upgrade if you don't want the new features, that can be a big problem for the software company which is trying to sell a product that is already feature complete.

Wed 30 Oct | Mr Jack | I took that as Joel saying that you can't change the way you do it after you've started doing it. Which I'd say is all the more reason to do it by subscription in the first place. Joel does site at least one company that does it the other way. And finally since he lists it as a mistake that rather implies he thinks it can be done better.

Wed 30 Oct | Darren Collins | Joel seems to me to be saying that the subscription-based model doesn't work with packaged software. I certainly wouldn't have bought CityDesk if it was sold by subscription, but I'm happy to pay for an upgrade every year as they add new features etc. Companies like SAS can get away with it because their software is hugely expensive to start with, so it's not Ma and Pop making a purchase decision, it's the accountants. Accountants are used to the idea of leasing equipment rather than paying for it up front, so they see this sort of arrangement as a good deal.

Wed 30 Oct | Joel Spolsky | Darren's got it right. I worry about this a lot, but I think the expectation has already been set that packaged software is a one-time license. Consumers aren't as good as accountants at translating prices between annual and one-time. We didn't create this mess but we have to live with it :)

Thu 31 Oct | A Guy What Writes Software | It really depends on your market. Most of the companies in my industry have an annual 'support' fee which covers telephone and email support, as well as 'remote' support using something like PC Anywhere or Citrix or whatever. This is usually somewhere in the area of 15% to 20% of the total original cost of the software, per year, invoiced monthly, quarterly or annually. It provides a steady stream of revenue for the software supplier, and gives the users a sense of security, since they get all upgrades and so on included in this. Having said this, it won't work for most off-the-shelf software, since it isn't usually business-critical. So what if Word doesn't work for half a day. But may J.R. Bob Dobbs help you if you can't print paycheques on payday! Certain things are worth investing in on an annual basis for support and upgrades. CityDesk isn't one of them, as much as I love it. It just isn't worth 15% per year to me.

Thu 31 Oct | Evan | Microsoft's Subscription Trial in Australia for Microsoft Office has failed, and the trial has been cancelled. Everyone who purchased a subscription is being given a full license to the software.

Thu 31 Oct | Serge Wautier | I wouldn't put CityDesk and FogBugz in the same bag. FogBugz might be the kind of mission critical software where users might accept subscribtions. This is the kind of software that must be up 24/7 (OK. Down to 8/5 according to the companies). If you have a problem, you can't just go and install the program on your neighbour's computer. Neither can you wait until next week for the problem to be solved.

Thu 31 Oct | Erik | Still, you would still need a 'regular' model for the people who do not have such needs that a maintenance contract is justified. In fact, many industries do just that. Sell the product, then sell a maintenance contract for those who need it, and provide maintenance on demand to people who can't justify a contract. Of course this only works well if the original product works well enough that maintenance is only an issue under special circumstances. Such as wear and tear for physical products, or accidents. Software does not have such physical properties. Hence, when the software itself is of acceptable quality, you don't so much need a maintenance contract for the software, as for the system you have of which the software is a part. Because the only friction you have with software (besides internal friction, or bugs) is between it and the system (operating system plus other applications). Actually, under those circumstances I can't think of a good reason for a software subscription.

Sun 03 Nov | Tj | This thread on Slashdot has incredibly good discussion on when one would lease. It's really about hardware than software, but the principles apply. http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/31/1120228&tid=98 Clearly, if you're a business that values cash highly because you're just starting out, leases are useful. Down the road, it depends on the specifics of your situation.

Making life make sense | Tue 29 Oct | tapiwa

I dont think that this is just a me phenomenon! I have on occasion read something, which just captured my view on life, and I have said to myself wow.... this person just put into words what I have felt all along. Has anyone else ever felt this, and what was it? To start off, here are my two .... Book: What is Man?, by Mark Twain. Quote: He would live must fight. He who will not fight in this world where eternal struggle is the law of life, has not the right to exist. --- anon

Tue 29 Oct | fellowes | 'In such condition, there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth, no account of time, no arts, no letters, no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of people, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. ' - Hobbes

Tue 29 Oct | Alex Chernavsky | “There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance – that principle is contempt prior to investigation.” — Herbert Spencer, _Principles of Biology_: London, 1864.

Tue 29 Oct | I AM | If I die of vanity, promise me, promise me they bury me someplace I don't want to be you'll dig me up and transport me unceremoniously away from the stolen city breeze garbage bag trees whispers of disease acts of enormity lower me slowly and sadly and properly get ry cooder to sing my eulogy ~ Gord Downie Through all our searching, the only thing that makes the emptiness bearable is each other. ~ Carl Sagan

Tue 29 Oct | Matt Kennedy | I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. -- Voltaire

Tue 29 Oct | 1 | 1

Tue 29 Oct | Brad Siemens | Dad

Tue 29 Oct | Marc | 'Dad' - Brad I'm still waiting to here that one (only 6 months old), but I can't see many words that beat it.

Tue 29 Oct | fellowes | No fair Brad!

Tue 29 Oct | Martha | Life's uncertain. Eat dessert first.

Tue 29 Oct | Susi Sloan | Two of my personal favorites: 'No problem can withstand the assault of sustained thinking.' --Voltaire 'There is no try. Do... or do not.' --Yoda

Tue 29 Oct | Zach Siemens | Eat your bitamins, They have 13 degrees of healthium!

Tue 29 Oct | Harvey T Pengwyn | 'The best defense against a bomb is not to be there when it goes off' - allegedly some book on military tactics but I can't find the source on Google 'ci è sempre guerra' - via a colleague ('there is always war' in italian)

Tue 29 Oct | Andrew Reid | 'If it bleeds, we can kill it' - Schwartzenegger

Tue 29 Oct | Vincent Marquez | 'Its time to kick ass and chew bubble gum, and i'm all outta gum' Duke Nukem

Tue 29 Oct | Eric W. Sink | Groucho Marx: Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

Wed 30 Oct | Virgil | 'Fortune favors the bold'

Wed 30 Oct | SPS Guy | In confusion, there is profit.

Wed 30 Oct | matt | Nobody ever said Elves are good. Elves are bad. Pratchet - Lords and Ladies

Wed 30 Oct | Mark Pearce | At midnight, when suddenly you hear an invisible procession going by with exquisite music, voices, don't mourn your luck that's failing now, work gone wrong, your plans all proving deceptive; don't mourn them uselessly. As one long prepared and full of courage, say goodbye to her, to Alexandria who is leaving. Above all, don't fool yourself, don't say it was a dream, your ears deceived you: don't degrade yourself with empty hopes like these. As one long prepared, and full of courage, as is right for you who were given this kind of city, go firmly to the window and listen with deep emotion, but not with the whining, the pleas of a coward; listen - your final pleasure - to the voices, to the exquisite music of that strange procession, and say goodbye to her, to the Alexandria you are losing.

Wed 30 Oct | Mark Pearce | 'People make themselves vulnerable by shaping their fears into pillars of trust with which they hold up the enormously heavy construct that is a responsible relationship. If you kick the supports loose, don't be surprised when the roof falls on your head.'

Wed 30 Oct | Ged Byrne | The people who really run organizations are usually found several levels down, where it is still possible to get things done. -- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)

Wed 30 Oct | dimiz | Mark: who wrote the 'Alexandria' poem? It wasn't Durell, was it?

Wed 30 Oct | Simon P. Lucy | We Are Not Here To Be Nice To People

Wed 30 Oct | Leonardo Herrera | All your bases are belong to us.

Wed 30 Oct | Ralph Chaléon | They didn't know it was impossible, so they did it. (my own translation). Ils ne savaient pas que c'était impossible, alors ils l'ont fait.

Wed 30 Oct | mark | 'Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure...than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.' --Theodore Roosevelt

Wed 30 Oct | Paul Brinkley | There is one quote which just speaks to me profoundly about our ability to demonstrate how close we are, still, to the animals, evolution-wise. The tenous grasp of the human intellect on language. I see it used frequently on Usenet. It has no attribution to a famous person who first said it. That quote is: 'Your an idiot.'

Wed 30 Oct | Jutta Jordans | 'Wird's besser, wird's schlechter fragt man alljährlich, seien wir ehrlich: Leben ist immer lebensgefährlich.' Erich Kaestner translates to something like: 'Year for year we ask: will it be better? will it be worse? Let's be honest: Life is always lethal.'

Wed 30 Oct | Mark Pearce | dimiz, The poem is called 'The God Abandons Antony', and was written by C P Cavafy.

Wed 30 Oct | Herbert Sitz | 'The scepticism that I advocate amounts only to this: (1) that when the experts are agreed, the opposite opinion cannot be held to be certain; (2) that when they are not agreed, no opinion can be regarded as certain by a non-expert; and (3) that when they all hold that no sufficient grounds for a positive opinion exist, the ordinary man would do well to suspend his judgment. ' -- Bertrand Russell, from 'On the Value of Scepticism'

Wed 30 Oct | Kevin | 'Nobody ever wins a fight.' -Dalton

Wed 30 Oct | Name Withheld | 'Deep down inside, everyone is a Ferengi'

Wed 30 Oct | Tj | We are told that talent creates its own opportunities. Yet, it sometimes seems that intense desire creates not only its own opportunities but also its own talents as well. All vague notions must fall before a pupil can call himself a master. (-- Bruce Lee, who died before he could break out of the stereotypical chinaman roles Hollywood gave him)

Wed 30 Oct | pod | Two quotes come to mind: 'Enlightened humanism is possible, careful thought can solve most problems, and while emotion is vital to the human spirit, it's no excuse for the bigotry and stupidity of prejudice.' - Gene Roddenberry 'However many ways of being alive there are, it must be true that there are infinitely more ways of being dead' - Richard Dawkins

Thu 31 Oct | Mark Pearce | 'We often don't see things as they are. We see them as we are.'

Thu 31 Oct | DB | 'Wherever you go, there you are.' From the movie Johnny Dangerously if I remember rightly...

Thu 31 Oct | Mark Pearce | 'Ely [n]: The first, faintest, tiniest inkling that something, somewhere has gone terribly wrong.' from 'The Meaning of Liff'

Thu 31 Oct | Chris Tavares | > 'Wherever you go, there you are.' > > From the movie Johnny Dangerously if I remember rightly... You misremember. It's from Buckaroo Banzai: Across the 8th Dimension. Don't mean to nitpick, but that's one of my favorite movies.

Fri 01 Nov | Do not use HTML tags. Surround URLs with spaces. | 'The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.' --George Bernard Shaw

Sat 02 Nov | Mark Pearce | 'There is only one sure means in life of ensuring that you are not ground into paste by disappointment, futility, and disillusion. And that is always to ensure, to the utmost of your ability, that you are doing it solely for the money.' Michael Chabon

Sun 03 Nov | Tim | $20! The same as in town! - alt.religion.kibology

Filemaker And coworkers | Fri 01 Nov | Eric Debois

Im a college teacher. We have been planning to build a little intranet for our staff for a while and since im the guy with the datamodelling/web app skills ive been put in charge of the project. The primary focus of the app will be an inventory database where all our hardware and software is registred. Simple stuff. The next thing is to tie the inventory to the scheduling so that the tech support can easily find out when and where certiain hardware and software needs be installed. No problemo so far. I could do this in less than a week with ASP or JSP. Approx. 30 ppl will use it. People around me are pushing Filemaker, praising its ease of use etc. One of the tech support guys in particular, is talking about how he could set up the inventory thing in a matter of hours. And to be honest I am a bit afraid that he will do just that and devote a load of time in to putting all the data into the database, with a datamodell I cant expand upon. And it feels a bit like he is invading my territorry. Yet I dont want to hurt his feelings either... Thoughts? And in any case, would filemaker be a good tool for this kind of job?

Fri 01 Nov | Herbert Sitz | You likely don't want to use Filemaker with something 30 people are going to be using. If you're going to be going above 2 or 3 users then you need to get FileMaker Server. And Filemaker Server isn't intended to go above 10 or 20 users, if I recall, per Filemaker's own documentation. Also, Filemaker isn't an SQL database, so you're right that it's not expandable at all. I would say that it's probably a good job to use MS Access for. If your tech support guy is savvy, he could build it just about as quickly in Access as in Filemaker, and you'd also be able to program against the database in your web pages if you wanted. Maybe you could even design the table structure yourself and give him a shot at making something usable in Access before you spend time coding your own solution. Time he spends getting data into the database won't be wasted, since you'll use the same back end even if he is unsuccessful at creating the Access front end. All of that may be irrelevant, because he's probably just a power user who's familar with Filemaker but not with Access. Or your users may not have Access licenses. If the Access licensing is a problem, you could just get a copy of MS Office Developer (around $500), which lets you make runtimes of the front end that can be freely redistristributed. This would still be cheaper than getting a copy of Filemaker Server (around $800, if I recall).

Fri 01 Nov | Herbert Sitz | Whoops, after reading your post again I wonder if you were planning on using Filemaker to web-enable the database over the intranet. You can do something similar with Access (using its Data Access Pages), but to use them you're required to have Access licenses for each client computer, although you don't actually have to have Access installed. Probably not a great idea to use Access in that case. But if the main thing is just to get networked access to the database, then Access would work well and you could forget about the intranet part.

Fri 01 Nov | BH | Design and build it yourself. The tech support guy probably won't understand relational design. Access and ASP is a simple, robust technology and ideal for this sort of project.

Fri 01 Nov | Eric Debois | Good Info. We have MS Office on every darn machine (300 +). The most logical choice would then be to build with Access. This allows for both a plain access front end, and building ASP pages for it if needed. Besides, we have quite a few people who know access pretty well here which is good in case im not around. (Which was the reason I canned my original highly scalable JSP/MySQL plan) Come to think of it, not building with access would be pretty stupid. The info on the filemaker server is crucial and pretty much disqualifies it for this job. *sigh of releif Thank you fellas

Fri 01 Nov | Herbert Sitz | I should amend what I've said to clarify that, yes, it is possible to run Filemaker Pro with 10 or 20 users without using Filemaker Server. It's just not recommended. For example, you can read some info at www.ebase.org, regarding ebase, which is a freely available nonprofit management tool based on Filemaker. They say, '6. Can ebase 2.0 be used on a peer-to-peer network? Not reliably. While FileMaker can be hosted on a peer-to-peer network of up to five computers, we do NOT support this approach. The potential problems inherent in Filemaker's peer-to-peer networking architecture will cause you to lose data. We strongly recommend the use of Filemaker Pro Server in all multi-user installations of ebase.' And I've heard many stories of frequent data corruption problems using multi-user Filemaker Pro. (Makes Access look bulletproof by comparison.) Also, the Filemaker Server version of the database isn't a whole lot better. It's still a fileserving database, not a true database server. Filemaker has its uses. But I wouldn't count serving a 30-user database among them.

Fri 01 Nov | pb | Excel might be adequate. No programming required.

Fri 01 Nov | Sam Gray | I shudder at the thought of putting data in Excel. It allows far too much flexibility, meaning the potential for users to utterly hose your app is way too high. FileMaker might be OK for storing data, but I've never liked it (I couldn't get past the lack of a real programming language), and its practice of storing views with data is just weird.. Access/ASP is probably a reasonable choice (though ASP is not particularly pretty). Also, if you wind up needing it, you can probably pick up a copy of Office Developer Edition for less than $500. I got it for $339 from ProVantage last year.

Sat 02 Nov | Simon Lucy | Don't worry about what database to use until you have a model to use it with. Concentrate on developing the database model, (my usual trumpet blowing of ORM here), then choose the right platform for the job. Then if things change and its no longer the best platform you can use the model again.

Sat 02 Nov | Albert D. Kallal | I think at the end of the day, one kind of has to use the tools one knows. You only need to avoid using a tool if it is not the right one for the job (but you still know it!!). I can’t imagine these people choosing FileMaker over your suggestion of using a web application? What gives? I am sure a better debate can even be brought up for FileMaker VS ms-access. FileMaker has improved its connectivity to databases by quite a bit recently (but has always been one of its shortcomings). You have a lot more choices with ms-access. Heck, you can use ms-access with the free open source MySql database if you want (if you do this, then you can’t use the nice diagramming tools to manage and build table relationships like you can when you use access with sql-server (or JET for that matter). Being able to point and click to manage your relations is very nice feature, and I wish this stuff could work with other databases then sql-server. As mentioned, ms-access also has a royalty free runtime that lets you package the application as a standard windows install. That means the users can install the application like any other windows product and they don’t have to have ms-access. In fact, they don’t even have to know that is it written using ms-access. I would go with the latest version of office-xp. (since the users don’t need access installed anyway). In fact, I would get office developer. It includes a ton of goodies like: Package and deployment wizards (create royalty fee installs) Visual SourceSafe Integration You get both Workflow designer for SQL, and you also get the developer version of sql 2000 server. You also get all kinds of other stuff like Frontpage 2002, and even Exchange server is included. (there is just tons of stuff included now). I mean, if there is no choice, then ms-access might be fine, but it seems that you have the ability to create a web based product. How could anyone consider anything else? Web based interface can be a bit weak, but it depends on the application. I have been a fairly harsh critic of web based software. However, it is getting much better, and the connectivity of web stuff is what is selling me right now. No client side maintenance is required with a web based system either. Albert D. Kallal Edmonton, Alberta Canada kallal@msn.com

Sat 02 Nov | Sam Gray | I've had a fair bit of experience supporting applications written for the Access runtime, and your results may vary. If you can do the install yourself or can afford to spend time walking your users through the install, it can be a good way to go. However, I've seen enough installation problems on PCs that already have a version of Access on them that I wouldn't advise it for a developer who doesn't want to be bothered by mere users. (=

Sat 02 Nov | Albert D. Kallal | >>However, I've seen enough installation problems on PCs that already have a version of Access on them that I wouldn't advise it for a developer who doesn't want to be bothered by mere users. (= The package and deployment stuff for ms-access is no where near as good as say VB. However, the new XP one is a good deal better. The solution here is simple: If you have a large number of installs and distributions, then I would suggest you purchase some sagekey scripts. They make scripts for both Wise, and Install shield That means one has to purchase Wise or Install-shield installer, and not use the p & d for office. When you use the scripts from Sagekey, then all of the problems of other versions of office, and browser stuff is eliminated. They are highly recommend, and if you want trouble free installs, they are the way to go. Their installs work flawlessly, and don’t break anything else on the pc. Check out: http://www.sagekey.com/

Blog | Thu 31 Oct | Prakash S

Which blog software (if any!) do you use?

Thu 31 Oct | Darren Collins | CityDesk. It's made by a company you might have heard of - Fog Creek Software. The site I built with it is here: http://www.pool-room.com

Thu 31 Oct | Alex Chernavsky | Likewise, CityDesk: http://www.astrocyte-design.com/blog/index.html It's free, until your site exceeds 50 files.

Thu 31 Oct | Prakash S | CityDesk ..ummm...let me think..... nah! does not sound familiar.