May 1, 2005

the six laws of software

Just got done rea­ding “The Six Laws of Soft­ware”, by Dror Eyal. Not a bad read at all. Here’s the blurb:

You’re too late! Most home con­su­mers have all the soft­ware they will ever need, and most com­pa­nies out there already have all the basic tech­no­lo­gies they need to suc­cess­fully com­pete.
What’s a soft­ware deve­lo­per to do? Read the Six Laws of the New Soft­ware to find out.

Right now I’m inte­res­ted in any kind of soft­ware that can reduce a company’s inter­nal cul­tu­ral fric­tion. That’s the story I’m going after. That’s the story that gets my atten­tion.
Yes, I already know, there are other equally worthy sto­ries out there.

7 Responses to “the six laws of software”

  1. sig says:

    Have to admit I agree with his views, as long as his assump­tions are valid.
    Assump­tion is that orga­ni­sa­tio­nal cul­ture (the way we do things) is unchan­ged.
    CRM, BPM, ERP and wha­te­ver are totally and com­ple­tely depen­dent on the current struc­tu­res and method­lo­gies — the orga­ni­sa­tio­nal cul­ture.
    Then he’s pro­bably right.
    Just like the IBM chap who sta­ted that the world mar­ket for com­pu­ters would be six. His assump­tion were also quite sim­ple, com­pu­ters where huge and used for scien­ti­fic cal­cu­la­tions. And we know what hap­pe­ned…
    If you blow a hole in the assump­tion and say that orga­ni­sa­tio­nal struc­tu­res, busi­ness metho­do­logy, mana­ge­ment theo­ries and prac­tice will change — then there will be a whole new mar­ket, a huge one as the old stuff would not work, at least not well.
    I can hear the argu­ment though that the com­pa­nies will not have any change, sta­tus quo is good enough etc.
    And I agree to that too, that is until one sin­gle com­pany does it. Chan­ges its cul­ture in com­plete and new ways — resul­ting in some major leap in com­pe­ti­ti­ve­ness (why else do it?), then we all know what will hap­pen.
    Every­body else will run for thee samee door as fast as they can.
    Add that there in fact is a move­ment towards expe­ri­men­ting in that direc­tion — Hugh said it, he wants to reduce inter­nal cul­tu­ral fric­tion. And what about asking all the million of Dil­bert rea­ders? Supect they’re mostly for some chan­ges too…
    Thus I would reph­rase from “…have all the soft­ware they need.” to “…have all the soft­ware they need today.”
    So no need to des­pair if you’re in soft­ware, just free your­self from the current thin­king, make something for the future that (very impor­tant for the cash-flow) can be used today.
    Eter­nally opti­mis­tic I am (which in the mind of my pes­si­mis­tic friends is called unrea­lis­tic, I don’t mind that ;-)

  2. sig says:

    Ahh, for­got to men­tion an alter­na­tive take on soft­ware — one of my favou­ri­tes: Joel Spolsky’s “Good Soft­ware Takes Ten Years. Get Used To It.”
    Here: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000017.html
    That would be soft­ware that makes an impact, not “just another CRM, toas­ter etc.” that should not take ten years… that would spell disas­ter for the deve­lo­per :)

  3. pheloxi says:

    one of pro­blems with soft­ware is that it too expen­sive it dri­ves peo­ple to ille­gal cop­ying. in some coun­tries is more than 40% of the soft­ware an ille­gal copy. may be it is time change the busi­ness model to a subsc­rip­tion like model, because it is bet­ter get some money than no money at all.
    another pro­blem is that soft­ware makers who keep only making soft­ware that is not using the “OS set­tings” and use small fonts only. two exam­ples:
    http://www.blinkx.com/
    - web­site and soft­ware unrea­da­ble for visual impai­red and the blind.
    - I know it is free, but it would have a lot more users if they used “adjus­ta­ble set­tings”.
    - they are also not very good lis­te­ners. I advice them twice to add “adjus­ta­ble set­tings” since they star­ted a few years back..
    - the current ver­sion is a waste of money.
    http://www.ifinger.com/
    - do not for­get to use coo­kies, because other­wise you can not even see the web­site.
    - they said they would do something about “adjus­ta­ble set­ting” 2 years ago.
    - there is paid ver­sion, but I would never pay for it.
    both might very inte­res­ting, but unu­sa­ble soft­ware, but because the soft­ware makers narrow min­ded view of the users.
    I want public apo­logy from them on their web­site, before I would start to use it!

  4. MarkN says:

    The soft­ware isn’t too expen­sive, its that you’re not in the tar­get mar­ket. Piracy is simply a way of redu­cing the cost enough for you to jus­tify using it. Kind of like kno­wing how to lie to an auto insu­rance com­pany or to the front desk at a typi­cal chain hotel.
    Its yield mana­ge­ment, man. Some­ti­mes they really don’t want your busi­ness because not having you as a cus­to­mer actually makes them more money.

  5. oheloxi says:

    you assume too much. I am not soft­ware spot­ter / collec­tor.
    more than 40% is ille­gal that is high per­cen­tage to say that soft­ware is not expen­sive, if was much lower it might be that.
    another ques­tion how many peo­ple would use it if the subsc­rip­tion model was used. I am tal­king about peo­ple who found it too expen­sive and do not want to use ille­gal.
    I think that soft­ware makers lost their eyes on the demand, because they create and the peo­ple must use it, but only with their price. you can see that peo­ple do not like it, because they look for inc­rease of ille­gal or free­ware or open source.
    I rather sup­port the mozi­lla, than pay for it. I want that choice!

  6. Tom says:

    sig, good soft­ware may take ten years, but “good enough” soft­ware takes sig­ni­fi­cantly less. So maybe we do have all the soft­ware we need but a lot of it isn’t “good enough” quite yet. Perhaps “The Six Laws” are what we need to push the barely ade­quate (or worse) soft­ware we have now into the good enough cate­gory.
    Per­so­nally, I think that any soft­ware that requi­res you to think about IT, rather than what you are really trying to do (write a book, create a logo, etc.) is a fai­lure. If you’ve ever switched to “Print Pre­view” mode in an appli­ca­tion, then you know what I mean. I think that pro­blem may be pos­si­ble to over­come, some­day at least, but I’m afraid I don’t see how that would eli­mi­nate cul­tu­ral dis­rup­tion. Then again, if ever­yone is thin­king about what they’re trying to do rather than how they’re doing it, maybe some of the cul­tu­ral dis­rup­tion disap­pears automatically.

  7. jim wilde says:

    Hey Hugh,
    I have a sim­ple solu­tion crea­ted around open source soft­ware that is making a dif­fe­rence in orga­ni­za­tions right now. It is not so much about “reduce a company’s inter­nal cul­tu­ral fric­tion”, although that may be the result — but more about embra­cing that fric­tion on many levels across the busi­ness to create new and bet­ter offe­rings, pro­ces­ses, and stra­te­gies. Every­body gets to par­ti­ci­pate and have a voice; it is not about a c-level show and the one big idea. Email me or check out my site for more info.