7 ms·

How so? They don't sell the model itself, they sell the 'tickets' to allow you to take a picture of it. That is not DRM.

ggg9990 9y ago
Yes, that’s what the OP is saying. Consumers fought against DRM so the business model became “never give them the software and you’ll never need to force DRM on them.”
- ucaetano 9y ago
  Except that no companies actually wanted the software in the first place, they wanted the service. [Edited: made it clear I was talking about companies]
  - ggg9990 9y ago
    Maybe you did, but I’d much rather have things like the Nest camera or text-to-speech as my own software. However, it’s impossible to get the same quality for the same amount spent this way, since vendors prefer the service business model.
    - ucaetano 9y ago
      Edited, made it clear I was talking about companies. But for most consumers, the same applies. Most people don't want to own records, or even own music. They want to listen to music. They don't want to own cars, they want to get to places. > However, it’s impossible to get the same quality for the same amount spent this way, since vendors prefer the service business model. Not just a matter of preference, but economies of scale. Most consumers don't want to install and run their own local CCTV service, so the market left for those who want is too small to achieve the same economies of scale as the service market.
      - z3t4 9y ago
        The machines used to be the thing of value, but now it's the software.
        ucaetano 9y ago
        > The machines used to be the thing of value, but now it's the software. Not exactly. The machines were never the value per se, the work they could do was the value. If you can buy the work without buying the machine, it is significantly better.
        z3t4 9y ago
        Yes, but if you could get it for free that would be even better. It's a fantastic business model to charge premium for something that cost almost nothing.
        ucaetano 9y ago
        > Yes, but if you could get it for free that would be even better. It's a fantastic business model to charge premium for something that cost almost nothing. Cost almost nothing? How much do you think was invested in research and development? But hey, feel free to open a company, invest billions of your own money in research and then give everything away for free with no revenue whatsoever. Sounds like a great business model!
        z3t4 9y ago
        It does not cost me anything if someone else runs my software. I can still charge for it. The research and development is already paid for. The business plan goes something like this: 1) Buy software 2) Sell copies of it ... But it will not work good if other people start to make copies of it, so you make it a SaaS instead, having the software run in "the cloud" where only you can copy it.
        ucaetano 9y ago
- btian 9y ago
  That's a very cynical interpretation. Even if Google wants to sell websearch software, there will be so few customers since it would cost billions of dollars to buy machines to run them, you'll need to build DC, get power etc. And what's wrong with services anyway?
  - z3t4 9y ago
    Google have infrastructure to to serve billions of requests per second, that is not be needed if you only serve yourself. Now imagine if every-one would scrape the web as often as Google does. :P Your mobile phone can run some billions of instructions per second. Now imagine a server case, or a rack. Compute power is very dense. And very cheap. The entire wikipedia (text only) can be stored on a micro-sim. eg a few mm.
    - ttsda 9y ago
      You probably meant micro-SD. And the amount of text content contained in Wikipedia is an atomically sized drop in the Internet's ocean.

ggg9990 9y ago

Yes, that’s what the OP is saying. Consumers fought against DRM so the business model became “never give them the software and you’ll never need to force DRM on them.”

ucaetano 9y ago
Except that no companies actually wanted the software in the first place, they wanted the service. [Edited: made it clear I was talking about companies]
- ggg9990 9y ago
  Maybe you did, but I’d much rather have things like the Nest camera or text-to-speech as my own software. However, it’s impossible to get the same quality for the same amount spent this way, since vendors prefer the service business model.
  - ucaetano 9y ago
    Edited, made it clear I was talking about companies. But for most consumers, the same applies. Most people don't want to own records, or even own music. They want to listen to music. They don't want to own cars, they want to get to places. > However, it’s impossible to get the same quality for the same amount spent this way, since vendors prefer the service business model. Not just a matter of preference, but economies of scale. Most consumers don't want to install and run their own local CCTV service, so the market left for those who want is too small to achieve the same economies of scale as the service market.
    - z3t4 9y ago
      The machines used to be the thing of value, but now it's the software.
      - ucaetano 9y ago
        > The machines used to be the thing of value, but now it's the software. Not exactly. The machines were never the value per se, the work they could do was the value. If you can buy the work without buying the machine, it is significantly better.
        z3t4 9y ago
        Yes, but if you could get it for free that would be even better. It's a fantastic business model to charge premium for something that cost almost nothing.
        ucaetano 9y ago
        > Yes, but if you could get it for free that would be even better. It's a fantastic business model to charge premium for something that cost almost nothing. Cost almost nothing? How much do you think was invested in research and development? But hey, feel free to open a company, invest billions of your own money in research and then give everything away for free with no revenue whatsoever. Sounds like a great business model!
        z3t4 9y ago
        It does not cost me anything if someone else runs my software. I can still charge for it. The research and development is already paid for. The business plan goes something like this: 1) Buy software 2) Sell copies of it ... But it will not work good if other people start to make copies of it, so you make it a SaaS instead, having the software run in "the cloud" where only you can copy it.
        ucaetano 9y ago
btian 9y ago
That's a very cynical interpretation. Even if Google wants to sell websearch software, there will be so few customers since it would cost billions of dollars to buy machines to run them, you'll need to build DC, get power etc. And what's wrong with services anyway?
- z3t4 9y ago
  Google have infrastructure to to serve billions of requests per second, that is not be needed if you only serve yourself. Now imagine if every-one would scrape the web as often as Google does. :P Your mobile phone can run some billions of instructions per second. Now imagine a server case, or a rack. Compute power is very dense. And very cheap. The entire wikipedia (text only) can be stored on a micro-sim. eg a few mm.
  - ttsda 9y ago
    You probably meant micro-SD. And the amount of text content contained in Wikipedia is an atomically sized drop in the Internet's ocean.