NOW: paradigm shift

[Ron Kracht]

Walter Vaughan wrote:
> Ron Kracht wrote:
>
>   
>> You do not correctly understand.
>>     
>
> I think the paradigm shift is that some people are quite comfortable with paying 
> for support contracts but are unwilling to continue treating and paying for a 
> pattern of bits on a disk as if they are physical objects that consume space 
> with a relation between consumption and cost to deliver.
>   
I recognize that thinking exists and that it affect perceived value, I'm 
just not sure it's always valid outside of mass consumer markets - 
especially in the case of a tool that allows you to earn/save money.  If 
that person is making or saving money using a software tool that someone 
else created is that significantly different than any physical tool.  
The equation is still the same, is the tool worth the cost?  Both 
'worth' and 'cost' can mean different things to different people. One 
person may calculate worth simply as 'how much income I can generate in 
a given period of time' another person might factor in availability of 
support, timing of bug fixes, priorities given to special needs, 
reliability of the toolmaker, availability of source code, cost of other 
comparable tools, or a number of other factors.  The same thing is true 
of cost. It might be a simple dollars and cents calculation, it might be 
more complex.  Almost certainly the calculation would ultimately involve 
relative value - is the worth of this tool (however they choose to 
calculate that) compared to the cost of this tool (however they choose 
to calculate that) greater than any comparable tool or set of tools. 
That's a process I can understand.  I even understand when a customer 
decides they can get more value with other tools - even though I may not 
always agree with that decision. 

I'm not sure I understand the mentality that says because the physical 
nature of this tool is nothing more that bits on a disk it has no more 
value that the disk. To me that is like saying a prescription medication 
should cost no more that the total cost of the physical ingredients.


> Currently the world is in a flux between boxed software mentality, and SAAS.
> No one likes change. Niche markets will be able to hold out longer, but 
> eventually "the computer is the network" will win out.
>   
We're working toward a model that will more easily allow our customers 
to be a provider of services. If our work creates tools that bring value 
to our customers it does not seem wrong to me to expect to be 
compensated for what goes into creating and maintaining those tools. 
Creating tools does not fit easily into the software as a service model. 
I suppose we could reinvent ourselves by using our software to create 
services rather than selling it to others but in the long run there 
would seem to me to be a lot less value created.

Ron