Where would the software industry go?

[stubbe]

This thought have bothers me for quite so long. Even tho I only see in a narrow field, specifically 3D animation/multimedia industry.

But here it is, for operating system, there's a solid alternative, open, and free (both free speech and free beer). The only complains by windows users is that Linux have lacks of support on commercial softwares and games. Maybe also the lack of variety on softwares under linux. Just see, freewares, sharewares, and similar most released under windows.

We'll just need to wait until Microsoft do a stupid move, then commercial softwares would probably go to Mac, then Mac would do a stupid move then commercial softwares would look into the most dominating distro. What are the candidates to replace either Mac and Windows? I mean the commercial ones? None I guess. Linux is in third place.

On my field, blender already kicks most middlewares arses. Seeing the software galleries of Strata3D, AC3D, or Carrrara 3D, they all look pathetic compared to Blender's gallery. Won't be long until hollywood adapt blender for their pipeline. Spiderman already include blender on the previz stage

Compositing, surely still dominated by autodesk with major players such as AE, toxik, or fusion, but I guess that'll sooner or later will change. An opensource compositing will someday pop out from nowhere and challenge those.

Audio, there's already audacity. Office you got openoffice. Servers, well don't we all know Linux is the primary choice.

The heavyweight softwares are mostly appear on entertainment industry. Specifically also games. But all I can see now, most commercial softwares are pursuing on to the realism. When games already reach 100% realism, where would they go?

Also checked epicgames website, most game companies now licensing Unreal 3 engine for their upcoming games, namely EA, Sega, etc. When one day an engine that could at least re-create the real world 99%, so innovation for game engines would be no more?

My guess is that game industry will fall back into the casual gaming field. But most of them are mere remakes of old games.

Is there really a field that I'm not really aware of, where commercial softwares would survive forever? Or maybe commercial softwares would only survive on custom built softwares, ordered specifically by corporates and companies? Maybe something like firmwares?

I'm just a software user, surely this condition would benefit me alot. All softwares would go far way cheaper, even free. Heh, now you can do most stuffs without any software cost at all by using linux, which was impossible to do back then without windows or mac.

But where would programmers go? Would all of them turn to be an idealist, generous and peaceful hippies, because the commercial software industries got beaten so bad by the opensource movement?

With these thoughts came up on my mind, now I'm thinking I'm very lucky I decide to never finish my IT major and move into art lol. Sure, they're just my assumptions. I could be wrong, but yet I could be right. What do you think?

[techieMoe]

I work in the software industry. I don't work in the game industry. I have friends (also with computer science degrees) who do work for the game industry. Now that I've established my point of view, I have some profound things to say on the topic of whether or not commercial software development will disappear all together.

*ahem*

Not going to happen.

Much as open-source zealots would love to believe, the world does not operate on good will alone. It operates on money and hard work, and people making money off of their hard work or the work of others.

Until someone comes up with a magic "make anything" machine (last I checked God has a patent on that one) you're always going to have to do some work to make software. Some people have other jobs they rely on for their living and code in their spare time. That's great, but do you think a major corporation or government entity is going to trust their mountains of data to a hobbyist who only works weekends?

I could go on, but I'll wait for someone to rebuff what I've just said to continue the dialogue.

[stubbe]

Until someone comes up with a magic "make anything" machine (last I checked God has a patent on that one) you're always going to have to do some work to make software.

True, I do think canonical employees have paid job? But the real codes come free from everywhere.

That's great, but do you think a major corporation or government entity is going to trust their mountains of data to a hobbyist who only works weekends?

That's the point. Probably goverment or high profile institutions will have full time programmers, or contract with software companies.

But what about software market? I mean something like boxed set? I'm talking about software market. Maybe later this industry will rely on contract based, not retail based?

[stubbe]

here's something to proof my thoughts

Blender No.1 animation packaged based on number of installed copies at BlenderNation

Suprisingly the industry standard, maya, placed way below. I do think the number is based on individuals, not the hollywood giant players. But yet, more and more people use this software, and since it's open, how long will it take blender to become the next industry standard? And blender IS a voluntary software, programmed by volunteers.

[bigtomrodney]

From what I have seen in the ISV field the money making is in offering services. I see guys spend a week writing a simple SQL based application once, and then charge $100k a year to one company to maintain and support it. That's where the money is made. With the exception of antivirus and anti-malware it's not end users paying for software - but instead the enterprise. With that in mind it doesn't matter whether it is commercial or open source as it the services that make money.

Hell I even know a piece of software that is 60% GPL and commands $75k per year for three seats. Now tell me you're worried about commercial software.

[leigh88]

But where would programmers go? Would all of them turn to be an idealist, generous and peaceful hippies, because the commercial software industries got beaten so bad by the open source movement?

With these thoughts came up on my mind, now I'm thinking I'm very lucky I decide to never finish my IT major and move into art lol. Sure, they're just my assumptions. I could be wrong, but yet I could be right. What do you think?

I don't think so. Maybe IT is not really for you. I do not work for a software company but, with the way see it, there are endless possibilities in the software industry especially in the field of communication.

[stubbe]

I don't think you guys get what I mean.

I know about service offering. There're couple of companies here offering support services for opensource softwares, namely linux. They set the servers, maintain and do upgrades if necessary. They give the copy for free, but for their services, they charge. Don't take it too far, canonical offering ubuntu for free, but for support they asking for charge/contract right?

Surely, you don't have to be in IT or art to get a job, yes. But what I mean, retail software products, boxed set, or something like that. Like I said this is contract based work.

Like Adobe, Corel, or Autodesk, etc. I'm pretty sure commercial software evolution will turn into service oriented instead of producing or publishing retail products, don't you agree? Somewhere like canonical?

Heck, cedega is another example. They use wine codes then sell it, also offering support for cedega. But those who really understand linux would choose wine instead, since the emulation isn't anywhere better.

By far, buying a commercial softwares don't get you nothing, you don't even own the software, but you get support service.

As product, opensource already provide most commercial software offer. Now what would become to those programmers type who actually CODE the softwares? What would the retail softwares become? Since opensource, sooner or later will replace commercial softwares. This is my point really.

[techieMoe]

Like Adobe, Corel, or Autodesk, etc. I'm pretty sure commercial software evolution will turn into service oriented instead of producing or publishing retail products, don't you agree? Somewhere like canonical?

Well, last I checked (and you said yourself) Canonical still employs full-time programmers. The service is only half the equation for a company like Adobe. The prospect of them open-sourcing their cash cow products like Photoshop and Dreamweaver is doubtful to say the least, and without programmers they wouldn't have any product to support.

Do I think it's possible that companies like Adobe might stop selling boxed products in favor of licensing agreements for electronic distribution or things of that nature? Sure. IBM does it for a lot of their mainframe products, and any number of service-oriented corporations have made their money doing this. However I don't think this spells the end of programmers. If anything it guarantees their future.

Heck, cedega is another example. They use wine codes then sell it, also offering support for cedega. But those who really understand linux would choose wine instead, since the emulation isn't anywhere better.

No, Cedega is much more than just repackaged WINE code. Transgaming licenses cryptography algorithms and various other methods for accessing copy-protected games. I'm just guessing here, but I'd wager they also work heavily with DirectX libraries from Microsoft.

By far, buying a commercial softwares don't get you nothing, you don't even own the software, but you get support service.

Last I checked, unless you buy software from Microsoft, you do actually own something. You pay for a license and a physical disc with most retail software, and most companies are very nice about the way they dole out licenses.

As product, opensource already provide most commercial software offer. Now what would become to those programmers type who actually CODE the softwares? What would the retail softwares become? Since opensource, sooner or later will replace commercial softwares. This is my point really.

So you're asking a "what if" based on the assumption that open-source software will eventually replace all commercial software? That's just conjecture, since no one can really say whether that will happen until it does. I personally don't believe open-source software will work for every single software niche in the world, and commercial closed-source applications will continue to thrive and make money for many decades to come. However my opinion too is just conjecture.

[stubbe]

Well, last I checked (and you said yourself) Canonical still employs full-time programmers. The service is only half the equation for a company like Adobe. The prospect of them open-sourcing their cash cow products like Photoshop and Dreamweaver is doubtful to say the least, and without programmers they wouldn't have any product to support.

Do I think it's possible that companies like Adobe might stop selling boxed products in favor of licensing agreements for electronic distribution or things of that nature? Sure. IBM does it for a lot of their mainframe products, and any number of service-oriented corporations have made their money doing this. However I don't think this spells the end of programmers. If anything it guarantees their future.

Yes, this is where my point is. Would there be any paid coders that actually produce a full featured softwares in the future?

AFAIK coders and artists are quite similar. Coders wrote a software for idealism, and seeing the potential of their product, they started to sell the software.

I mean like when a coder use a software, then he thought "this software were not suppose to be like this! I can code something better than this", then he wrote a software with similar function, with different workflow, maybe with different feature.

Otherwise, we'll only see adobe photoshop. There will be no GIMP, or Corel Photopaint and Fireworks or Artrage and Deeppaint would we?

Or in games, a game geek coders played a game, hey I have a good story and concept, why don't I try to build a game myself and realizing my own dreams? So there you go, beside we play Doom, we also able to play Half life and Unreal, in this case.

It's all about the urge of making something better. This idealism goes furhter with the FSF idealism.That codes must be visible and free to distribute and shared.

No, Cedega is much more than just repackaged WINE code. Transgaming licenses cryptography algorithms and various other methods for accessing copy-protected games. I'm just guessing here, but I'd wager they also work heavily with DirectX libraries from Microsoft.

yes, such features like CD-Rom protection emulation and the point2play feature. Some lines of Directx and security features from wine I think came from cedega contribution I suppose. But if you have tried cedega yourself, I would think you would choose wine.

After wine changed its license, I suppose cedega people can't "borrow" the codes anymore. Heck, how many cedega staffs currently? Compared to volunteers around the world? Wine is de facto emulation software for linux. I would bet, wine would last longer than cedega.

Last I checked, unless you buy software from Microsoft, you do actually own something. You pay for a license and a physical disc with most retail software, and most companies are very nice about the way they dole out licenses.

But the real thing is, they also have the right to cease your license. Physical disc, you can actually easy obtain from illegal places everywhere. Cheap. Some people who don't really care about the legal aspects of their softwares, would choose that alternative instead right?

So you're asking a "what if" based on the assumption that open-source software will eventually replace all commercial software? That's just conjecture, since no one can really say whether that will happen until it does. I personally don't believe open-source software will work for every single software niche in the world, and commercial closed-source applications will continue to thrive and make money for many decades to come. However my opinion too is just conjecture.

Yes, that's my assumption and I do really like to asking "what ifs" question to myself.

Right now, opensource software only lack of documentation and promotions, well perhaps also features. People, specially casual users barely hear about the alternatives. The commercial softwares got into the "industry standard" rank because merely most people hear about it, not because it's 100% effective in productions.

My brother, who is really computer illiterate, refused to use openoffice, simply because he never heard of it, he prefers to use MS Office. While most thing he does was just to write some letters or papers, which I do too with open office without any problem for years.

Alot of friends of mine, often use Photoshop, but from what I see he just use it to flip, resize or even to just convert the format (from BMP to JPG). Most of them even use the full featured ACDSee, to view their image colletions. Simply because they only heard of photoshop, and never hear about GIMP or Irfanview, or something else similar.

In the feature aspects, blender is a good example. It have most features owned by industry standards. Name it, blender probably have it. Compared to middlewares, blender already way surpass them in term of features.

Now, wether I'm right or wrong, people would choose cheaper alternatives to do their job, right? Right now, the so-called "industry standard" mostly because they're the pioneer.

The only lack of FOSS is they never heard of it. What if that day comes, when opensource have become much popular than now? And internet are very common in third world countries? Where would boxed commercial set go?

[techieMoe]

yes, such features like CD-Rom protection emulation and the point2play feature. Some lines of Directx and security features from wine I think came from cedega contribution I suppose. But if you have tried cedega yourself, I would think you would choose wine.

I have tried Cedega, in several versions, all the final paid release. On some of my past computers (Rig 1) it refused to run at all, but on others (Rig 2) it ran almost anything I threw at it quite well.

On the computers that wouldn't run Cedega, they also wouldn't run WINE, so no, I wouldn't choose the free version with less features simply on principal.

After wine changed its license, I suppose cedega people can't "borrow" the codes anymore. Heck, how many cedega staffs currently? Compared to volunteers around the world? Wine is de facto emulation software for linux. I would bet, wine would last longer than cedega.

Perhaps the WINE project will outlast the Transgaming company, but do you honestly thing there is more work being done in the WINE project than Cedega when it comes to games? Realize that WINE has an infinitely broader scope than Cedega. WINE is trying to work with any MS Windows application in general, whereas Cedega concentrates on games only.

This allows more feature-filled releases and a faster release schedule than a project that tries to do more. I would say that in the target realm of Cedega (games) they're leaps and bounds ahead of the WINE project.

But the real thing is, they also have the right to cease your license. Physical disc, you can actually easy obtain from illegal places everywhere. Cheap. Some people who don't really care about the legal aspects of their softwares, would choose that alternative instead right?

How many companies other than Microsoft have you ever heard of revoking a paid license? Realistically? I get the impression that you think all commercial software companies are just out there to try and squeeze every last dime out of you and pull the rug out when you won't buy their latest product.

People, specially casual users barely hear about the alternatives. The commercial softwares got into the "industry standard" rank because merely most people hear about it, not because it's 100% effective in productions.
. . .
Alot of friends of mine, often use Photoshop, but from what I see he just uses it to flip, resize or even to just convert the format (from BMP to JPG). Most of them even use the full featured ACDSee, to view their image collections. Simply because they only heard of photoshop, and never hear about GIMP or Irfanview, or something else similar.

In the feature aspects, blender is a good example. It have most features owned by industry standards. Name it, blender probably have it. Compared to middlewares, blender already way surpass them in term of features.

Now, wether I'm right or wrong, people would choose cheaper alternatives to do their job, right? Right now, the so-called "industry standard" mostly because they're the pioneer.

The only lack of FOSS is they never heard of it. What if that day comes, when opensource have become much popular than now? And internet are very common in third world countries? Where would boxed commercial set go?

No. It's hard to predict the future, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that there will absolutely never be a completely open-source software economy all over the world. There are just too many real-life barriers to that, not the least of which is that OSS simply doesn't fit in all situations.