3 ms·

Learning moment: developers can't be wedded to a particular technology. Qt is fantastic but it's not the business. We can't invest ourselves in companies that a

Learning moment: developers can't be wedded to a particular technology. Qt is fantastic but it's not the business. We can't invest ourselves in companies that are floundering and Nokia has been floundering for a number of years. If you find yourself investing your talents in a company that has multiple directional changes you need to consider the likelihood that the company will ever return to good times.

borism 16y ago
so by that logic: - if you develop for Palm WebOS, you're relying on company whose main business is selling printer ink - if you develop for Android, you're relying on company whose main business is selling ads - if you develop for iOS, you're relying on company whose main business is selling audiovisual content and portable players for it then Microsoft IS the only company that you can rely on, since it's primary business is selling software?
- forgotAgain 16y ago
  if you develop for Palm WebOS, you're relying on company whose main business is selling printer ink. Yes, I would not develop for WebOS at this point. if you develop for Android, you're relying on company whose main business is selling ads Yes but you are helping them to sell ads. if you develop for iOS, you're relying on company whose main business is selling audiovisual content and portable players for it Yes, but you are adding value to their main product. then Microsoft IS the only company that you can rely on, since it's primary business is selling software? I don't think so. In markets where Microsoft does not have a monopoly it has been quite willing to change directions irregardless of its impact on developers. For example Silverlight. In markets where they do have a monopoly well they have a monopoly. You can make money serving that monopoly with consulting but you can't do much with independent products.
- ajdecon 16y ago
  Well, or there's Blackberry.

borism 16y ago

so by that logic: - if you develop for Palm WebOS, you're relying on company whose main business is selling printer ink - if you develop for Android, you're relying on company whose main business is selling ads - if you develop for iOS, you're relying on company whose main business is selling audiovisual content and portable players for it then Microsoft IS the only company that you can rely on, since it's primary business is selling software?

forgotAgain 16y ago
if you develop for Palm WebOS, you're relying on company whose main business is selling printer ink. Yes, I would not develop for WebOS at this point. if you develop for Android, you're relying on company whose main business is selling ads Yes but you are helping them to sell ads. if you develop for iOS, you're relying on company whose main business is selling audiovisual content and portable players for it Yes, but you are adding value to their main product. then Microsoft IS the only company that you can rely on, since it's primary business is selling software? I don't think so. In markets where Microsoft does not have a monopoly it has been quite willing to change directions irregardless of its impact on developers. For example Silverlight. In markets where they do have a monopoly well they have a monopoly. You can make money serving that monopoly with consulting but you can't do much with independent products.
ajdecon 16y ago
Well, or there's Blackberry.