No subject

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.