5 ms·

These companies are doing well and making billions. We can assume that we will see more similar ones, as long as users still use their products in similar situ

by nicce 3y ago

These companies are doing well and making billions. We can assume that we will see more similar ones, as long as users still use their products in similar situations.

mistrial9 3y ago
no, it is more like this. Imagine building a great city. Each group decides what they would like to make, and their skills. One group decides to make a "book press" , where all the parts of making a paper book are improved. A different group decides to make a lock and key system, so that any time a city person wants to read a book, any book, they must use a key for that lock system. The City government over time is included, to say that "yes, we need these locks for safety" Years pass.. the thousands of amazing and efficient books are printed, but people now have more books than they know how to use. But the lock system is in more places. The book maker group now has bills to pay, and the interest in new books is less and less. But the lock people are making more money every month. SO the fine book people decide that they must now build locks.
- AndrewKemendo 3y ago
  Great way to put it. The structure of the firm dictates it’s future.
- immibis 3y ago
  I saw this described as the conflict between business and industry. Industry is making things. Books, food, video games, computers, petrochemicals. Business is getting money. Business strangles industry to death all the time. The only thing we can do about it is make things that can't possibly be monetized. This is relatively easy in software - but still hard. Linux succeeded, and nobody pays for Solaris. Git succeeded, and nobody pays for Bitkeeper. One day there will be an open source equivalent to Autodesk and nobody will make money selling Autodesk equivalents, but the world will be better off. But the people who make these things won't be rewarded, because they won't be doing business. Indeed, in many cases they'll go straight to prison.
  - cyanydeez 3y ago
    Government should be charged with identifying services and goods that benefit the public domain so much that it adds it to the Library.
  - justsomehnguy 3y ago
    > One day there will be an open source equivalent to Autodesk and nobody will make money selling Autodesk equivalents The biggest trouble (after making a CAD software itself) is to keep it in line with a current regulations. I'm not familiar if A. even does that, but some regional alternatives are making money not only on the SW itself, but by providing services related to be in the compliance of regulations.
    - roarcher 3y ago
      Do you mean that CAD software itself has to comply with certain regulations? Or that it helps engineers comply with regulations regarding their designs? Not a professional CAD user myself, but as a hobbyist with an interest in this space I've never heard of the former case, so I'm curious.
      - justsomehnguy 3y ago
        > it helps engineers comply with regulations regarding their designs This one, I should had frame it better. > I've never heard of the former case I don't think the CAD software itself is a point of a regulations, but there are definitely some standards and regs regarding how it should be done. A quick search yielded [0] which is a nice example of how it could be done by a hand, yet it would help immensely if the CAD software would aid and do the things by itself, saving both the time and man-hours. [0] https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-and-construction/computeraided-design-standards https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-and-construction/comp...
        roarcher 3y ago
        Thanks for the clarification! This makes sense. I do wonder who is liable if the software used to design a bridge outputs incorrect simulation results and the bridge collapses as a consequence. I suppose it's on the senior project engineer (or whoever ultimately signs off on the design) to verify the results somehow. Edit: This article [0] talks about the "trust" placed in commercial and open-source CAD software by engineers and doesn't mention regulation/certification of the software itself, which seems to imply that there is none. [0] https://www.simscale.com/blog/open-source-software-cae/ https://www.simscale.com/blog/open-source-software-cae/

by nicce 3y ago

These companies are doing well and making billions. We can assume that we will see more similar ones, as long as users still use their products in similar situations.

mistrial9 3y ago

no, it is more like this. Imagine building a great city. Each group decides what they would like to make, and their skills. One group decides to make a "book press" , where all the parts of making a paper book are improved. A different group decides to make a lock and key system, so that any time a city person wants to read a book, any book, they must use a key for that lock system. The City government over time is included, to say that "yes, we need these locks for safety" Years pass.. the thousands of amazing and efficient books are printed, but people now have more books than they know how to use. But the lock system is in more places. The book maker group now has bills to pay, and the interest in new books is less and less. But the lock people are making more money every month. SO the fine book people decide that they must now build locks.

AndrewKemendo 3y ago
Great way to put it. The structure of the firm dictates it’s future.
immibis 3y ago
I saw this described as the conflict between business and industry. Industry is making things. Books, food, video games, computers, petrochemicals. Business is getting money. Business strangles industry to death all the time. The only thing we can do about it is make things that can't possibly be monetized. This is relatively easy in software - but still hard. Linux succeeded, and nobody pays for Solaris. Git succeeded, and nobody pays for Bitkeeper. One day there will be an open source equivalent to Autodesk and nobody will make money selling Autodesk equivalents, but the world will be better off. But the people who make these things won't be rewarded, because they won't be doing business. Indeed, in many cases they'll go straight to prison.
- cyanydeez 3y ago
  Government should be charged with identifying services and goods that benefit the public domain so much that it adds it to the Library.
- justsomehnguy 3y ago
  > One day there will be an open source equivalent to Autodesk and nobody will make money selling Autodesk equivalents The biggest trouble (after making a CAD software itself) is to keep it in line with a current regulations. I'm not familiar if A. even does that, but some regional alternatives are making money not only on the SW itself, but by providing services related to be in the compliance of regulations.
  - roarcher 3y ago
    Do you mean that CAD software itself has to comply with certain regulations? Or that it helps engineers comply with regulations regarding their designs? Not a professional CAD user myself, but as a hobbyist with an interest in this space I've never heard of the former case, so I'm curious.
    - justsomehnguy 3y ago
      > it helps engineers comply with regulations regarding their designs This one, I should had frame it better. > I've never heard of the former case I don't think the CAD software itself is a point of a regulations, but there are definitely some standards and regs regarding how it should be done. A quick search yielded [0] which is a nice example of how it could be done by a hand, yet it would help immensely if the CAD software would aid and do the things by itself, saving both the time and man-hours. [0] https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-and-construction/computeraided-design-standards https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-and-construction/comp...
      - roarcher 3y ago
        Thanks for the clarification! This makes sense. I do wonder who is liable if the software used to design a bridge outputs incorrect simulation results and the bridge collapses as a consequence. I suppose it's on the senior project engineer (or whoever ultimately signs off on the design) to verify the results somehow. Edit: This article [0] talks about the "trust" placed in commercial and open-source CAD software by engineers and doesn't mention regulation/certification of the software itself, which seems to imply that there is none. [0] https://www.simscale.com/blog/open-source-software-cae/ https://www.simscale.com/blog/open-source-software-cae/