Are American high tech workers obsolete?

[Hewitt Tech]

Thanks maddog. Since I asked the question initially, I've been moving
steadily in the direction of your answer. The economics of the situation are
both compelling and obvious. Since I left the fold of the "big company" I've
been doing independent consulting gigs here and there and I would hasten to
add that there is a ton of work if you're willing to go look for it. Beyond
that, even though the small business (mom & pop) space is dominated by
Microsoft, the logic of open source is overwhelming. I'm finding that
initially I'm asked to fix some kind of MS Windows problem but fairly
shortly thereafter I'm asked about a file server or a web server. At that
point I can only recommend an open source solution. If I don't I then need
to tell my customer that they need to count noses and ante up the Microsoft
tax for any more than one user.

Geez, I might be turning into a zealot! Kinda fun really! ;^)

-Alex


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Hall" <maddog at li.org>
To: <discuss at gnhlug.org>
Cc: <maddog at li.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: Are American high tech workers obsolete?


> Hi,
>
> Alex asked me to comment on this topic even though it has died down a bit
on
> the list.  I will try to be brief [Several hours later I can see that I
have
> failed in being brief.]
>
> First of all, everything I have seen indicates that Open Source is
actually
> decentralizes software development.
>
> In the early days of computers, there was no such thing as "shrink-wrapped
> software".  This was due mainly to two factors:
>
> o lack of a large enough market for software (due to the ultra high
>   price of computing)
>
> o lack of a "standard" platform, which helped extend the above bullet
>           even longer into the history of computing
>
> When someone wanted a piece of software, they typically went to a company
that
> developed that type of software and negotiated a contract that said what
they
> were buying and how it would be tailored to their needs.  I participated
in
> several of these contract negotiations.  Boy were they fun (said with deep
> sarcasm).  But we got what we paid for.  In effect, software was a service
> industry.
>
> Then the micro-computer brought about the age of shrink-wrapped software.
> Not at first.  Not in the days of the Altair, but in the later days of the
> Lisa, Macintosh and "IBM PC".  Remember Charlie Chaplin and the rose?
Remember
> Computertown?  Remember when Digital Equipment Corporation had their
retail
> stores (probably for about one year, ouch).
>
> From that point on you had the small number of engineers making a software
> PRODUCT that could be designed and manufactured ANYWHERE and sold to the
> world's customers.  It fit anywhere from 50-90% of a customer's needs for
that
> type of product, but it was inexpensive (realatively).
>
> Manufactured software is probably the easiest to ship off for creation in
> India or China. After that it is just having the language catalogs and
manuals
> translated in the USA to English (or something that approximates English).
> There is no bickering about who does what, or what real-world customers
want,
> you just give them "new functionality".  I am just being a little
sarcastic
> here, but from working at DEC I know that sometimes the drive is more to
get
> hardware out the door then get needed software functionality out.
>
> And while there is nothing to stop someone writing even a very complex set
of
> requirements and tests for conformance (my heavens, it is all coming back
to
> me!) and shipping it to off-shore development, you might only go that
route if
> you were going to save a SIGNIFICANT amount of money, which might happen
if
> the project required a LOT of programming from the ground up.
>
> With Open Source, however, that is becoming less and less of the case.
Massive
> systems can be created by using database engines, web servers, search
engines,
> shell tools, python widgets, and other "building blocks".  The skill now
is
> not so much in the knowledge of how to program really fast code, but how
to
> produce good solutions really fast.  This is something that is hard to do
> over long distances and through different cultures.
>
> Having to go through three more iterations of development because of lack
of
> understanding, or partial completion, or different time zones, is time
expensive.
> Having someone local to look at the issue, and resolve it locally to your
> satisfaction is time saving.
>
> Time is money.
>
> I will be the first to agree that the world is more global, and we will
never
> be able to go back.  We can fight globalization with sanctions, but those
have
> failed in the past.
>
> I will also say that the "golden age of software" is probably at an end
from
> one standpoint, and that I do not expect that a "Microsoft" will ever
spring
> again from the ashes.  The creation of closed-source, low-investment,
high-
> margin manufactured software is dead.  When you get software that fits
that
> catagory, there will be someone who will create an Open Source, free
alternative
> sooner or later.
>
> When you have a billion people using computers, then you will have
500,000,000
> who will be dissatisfied enough with the software to complain about it,
> 100,000 that will "do something"; 1,000 who will have the skills to do
something
> and 500 who will have the skills and take the time to do something....but
that
> will be enough.
>
> But when only two people are interested in a piece of software, and are
> competitors of each other, then it is unlikely that the one who develops
the
> code will GPL the result.
>
> Now we have Open Source software, where large bodies of customizable code
are
> put together by skilled people to create complex solutions.  Mom&Pop(TM)
will
> probably have someone help them pull the code down over the net and
install it
> on their machine.  They might pay a little for this to be done, after all
they
> do not have to pay $700. for MS office, so paying someone $100. to do this
is
> not outrageous.
>
> Larger companies (or government organizations) may join together into
Guilds
> that fund development of Open Source software to their needs and support.
> One hundred townships getting together and pooling $100,000. (cheap by
> software licensing prices) could fund a consultant to produce an Open
Source
> solution for them.
>
> Now any "hacker" might be able to do this in a relatively short time.  But
> would it scale?  Would it be maintainable? Would it be flexible?  And how
> long would it take them to put it together?  The better the integrator,
the
> more they can charge per hour because the fewer hours it will take them
> to do it and the result will be better.
>
> Would the average "hacker" know your business?  Would they be able to help
> you build the system to do exactly what you need to do, or would they have
> to first study what "you really want" to interpret "what you really
meant."
>
> Just as Master Craftsmen used to maintain portfolios of their work, or
> good carpenters would point to a house they had completed, so will
computer
> programmers have to maintain a better portfolio of their jobs.  Of course
with
> Open Source projects this will be easy.  But how many of you can show
someone
> (legally) what you have been working on these past ten years?  Can you
show
> them the projects you have worked on, and the elegant solutions you have
> derived?
>
> By the way, it is interesting that the title of this thread was "Are
American
> High Tech Workers Obsolete?"  Why not ask the quesiton "Are New Hampshire
> High Tech Workers Obsolete?"  Production software creates the same issues
> state by state that it creates nation by nation.  It is just whether or
not you
> have to convert your currency as you shovel it some other place.  Why
should
> the New Hampshire government pay one single dime more to the State of
> Washington, or the State of California?  Why should we fund their schools,
> their workers?
>
> By the way, why should we be forced to send our hard-earned money to
> Peru via the Microsoft company when Microsoft gives Peru $500,000,000. to
use
> Microsoft software.  That money came from Microsoft's customers.  Why
isn't
> Microsoft using it to make better software, or better support.  Why isn't
> Microsoft lowering their prices, if they can afford to give away
$500,000,000.
> If I want to donate to Peru, I will donate through some agency like
UNICEF,
> thank you.  Or I can donate my skills by writing and distributing free
software.
>
> My fear for the American economy is not lack of work, but lack of skill
and
> pride.  I took pride in my abilities to make programs work faster when I
> was doing active programming.  Not 10% or 20% faster, but TWO HUNDRED
TIMES
> FASTER than some other "professional" programmers had accomplished.
> And I was able to do this little feat not just once, but many times, with
> different programs from different programmers on different systems.
>
> I look at the students who come here from other countries to learn and
> excel, and I look at our "average students" who can not tell where the
United
> States is on a map of the world.
>
> I refuse to watch Jay Leno on his nighttime show anymore.  I might see one
> of these "scholars".
>
> This is one reason why I like Linux.  Most of the people who like Linux
are
> willing to go that one further step to having a better operating system.
They
> are willing to learn that extra piece of knowledge that can make their
> work go faster and better.  I meet young men and women who far surpass
their
> compatriots not only in computer science, but in their quest for knowledge
in
> other areas as well, and this gives me hope.
>
> Finally, if economics were so easy that we could simply say that
"Globalization
> will distroy the American way of life" then we would not need Alan
Greenspan.
> What might be happening is that the true aspects of what made American
great:
>
> o work hard
> o lifelong learning
> o always looking to be better
>
> may be coming back into style in the software industry.
>
> Well, that is about my $0.02 on it.  I am fairly sure that Henry L. Hall
(no
> relation) will raise me by three cents, but I stand pat.
>
> md
> --
>
============================================================================
=
> Jon "maddog" Hall
> Executive Director           Linux International(SM)
> email: maddog at li.org         80 Amherst St.
> Voice: +1.603.672.4557       Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A.
> WWW: http://www.li.org
>
> Board Member: Uniforum Association, USENIX Association
>
> (R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries.
> (SM)Linux International is a service mark of Linux International, Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnhlug-discuss mailing list
> gnhlug-discuss at mail.gnhlug.org
> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
>