> No, I'd say that Unix/Linux is probably the single most well-known example
> of what I'm talking about.
If you want to look at it from that point, yes, all the parts have
been changed to protect the innocent. (I worked on an early cyclotron
that had been through that, I think the last part was replaced while we
were working on it in college.)
> Oh, I agree with you there -- and I also agree with your point that
> sometimes a non-computer solution is actually better. The trick is
> knowing which is which, and it's a trick I've screwed up myself more
> than once.
(Laughing) Yes!!! Both of us!
> > A car is an investment, and needs to be treated as such, or you will
> > just waste an incredible amount of money buying the latest car every year.
>
> Maybe the problem is that we have different definitions of "investment".
> Or maybe I should phrase it "good investment".
"Good investment", I think. A lot of things we invest in have a
limited life span. Books, education, shoes...
> A car is not an investment, as far as I'm concerned, because it does
> not appreciate in value. (With those rare exceptions of vintage cars.)
It is an investment in that you are acquiring a capital asset that
facilitates your productivity and your capacity for tackling other
opportunities. A bad vehicle, on the other hand, has an opportunity cost.
I blew an engine on a car once, and estimate it cost me close to a hundred
thousand dollars in opportunity cost, because I lost the contract I was
driving to interview for. Even adjusted for a reduced chance of winning,
it still cost far more than a new vehicle. (But given the comfort of that
old car, after trying a few others, I had a newer engine put in the car.
The car is still being used by a friend of mine. I would have kept it if
I had stayed on the East coast.)
> But it means that it's NOT an investment, because you'll never get all
> that money back out of it.
Common terminology would label it a capital investment, whether it
depreciates or appreciates. But books are also termed expenses, even
though they are investments in yourself.
> save you money -- they do not appreciate in value. (Hmmm...I wonder
> which depreciates faster, a new car or a new PC?)
Whether something appreciates or depreciates is not as important as
whether it produces a return on the investment. (ROI) Your car may
depreciate, but if you use it to haul your body to contract assignments
that you might not otherwise be able to handle, you are getting a return
on investment.
> > Define "old". Software does not "age"; but some needs change. Look
> > at needs, not software/hardware.
>
> Well, the stuff that I wrote in the paragraph above is what I mean
> by "throw it away" -- maybe that's not the right catch phrase to
> summarize it with, but it seemed apropos to me. Hmmm...I wonder if
> we agree on the strategy, but not on the way I expressed it.
Probably, Rich, since you are a rather bright fellow who has been in
the field earning yourself an a lot of other people a living for some
time.
I have similar terminology problems when I look at things outside of
my immediate area of expertise.
> But your point ("Define 'old'") is an excellent one. I'd say
> that software is "old" when any of these happen:
>
> - aggregate maintenance costs approach a significant percentage of
> the cost of a total rewrite
> - the platform it runs on (hardware, OS, etc.) is approaching
> or at end-of-life
> - the language it's written in ceases to be used for new systems
Meaning it is hard to get labor to do the work.
> - the effort to port it to new platforms exceeds the effort
> needed to rewrite it
> - advances in architecture/networking/algorithms/etc. render
> the basic structure of the software obsolete (i.e. it would *not*
> be designed that way again)
>
> I'll have to think about that some more -- because that's really the
> first time I've tried to answer that question.
Most software becomes old when needs and wants change.
> > If they could see further, they wouldn't be counting the beens, they
> > would be counting the coulds. We need more could counters.
>
> Amen, brother! *THOSE* are the people who are true business leaders,
> (because they are leaders, period) and unfortunately they're getting
> scarcer all the time.
Yes! That is what I meant with the other piece about business
management. One manager really called my father on the carpet long ago;
because he saw that expenditures on maintenance had dropped by some 75%
one year -- he was afraid that the company was being run into the ground
by my father's not spending enough on maintenance. Dad pointed out that
they had gone to diamond tools the year before, changed lubricating oils,
found cheaper sources for rebuilding equipment, and invested in a bunch of
other things that cut costs while extending the life of existing
equipment. It turned out to be a rather positive session.
> At least as far as I can tell. Maybe (once again) I'm being too cynical
> about this; but what I can see from here shows a business landscape
> run on fear and hype and CYA and greed; I'd don't see much in the
> way of boldness and entrepenurial spirit and innovation and fairness.
It depends... sometimes a company just has to wait to find the right
opportunity to exploit, and be really ready for it. And sometimes... like
one company my cousin worked for... dropped out of a not terribly
profitable market area just half a year before it exploded! Fiber
Optics... they had been one of the top companies in the field, but when
the old owner sold the company... something had to be cut.
That manager told my father that all a good manager can do, it so try
to build the right team. When you have the right team, almost nothing is
impossible! But if you don't have the right team, it is too easy to fight
a lot of losing battles and destroy the spirit of what you do have.
> Someone that knows me well says that I'm too much of a Boy Scout about
> it (I never was one as a kid, btw); I'm not sure if that's the case
> or if I just have impossibly high standards. On that instrospective
> note, I think I'll sign off and think more about what makes software
> "old" and see if I can't come up with a better phrase than "throw it away".
Re-engineering.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------- IMAGINEERING --------------------------
----------------- Every mouse click, a Vote -------------------
---------- Do they vote For, or Against your pages? -----------
----- What people want: http://www.mall-net.com/se_report/ ----
---------------------------------------------------------------
--- Have you analyzed your viewer's footprints in the logs? ---
--- Webmaster's Resources: http://www.mall-net.com/webcons/ ---
--- Web Imagineering -- Architecture to Programming CGI-BIN ---
---------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
