4 ms·

I read once where Bill Gates predicted that eventually people would buy software and that the hardware would be free. I can't remember where I read it ('Busines

I read once where Bill Gates predicted that eventually people would buy software and that the hardware would be free. I can't remember where I read it ('Business at the Speed of Light', maybe?) but it stuck with me as just, well, ridiculous. Anyway, the fact that he says "As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share." kind of makes me wonder how he ever ended up with that thought I mentioned at the start. And I know it sounds crazy that he would ever think that: that's why it stuck with me I guess.

bconway 14y ago
I read once where Bill Gates predicted that eventually people would buy software and that the hardware would be free. I can't remember where I read it ('Business at the Speed of Light', maybe?) but it stuck with me as just, well, ridiculous. Have you looked at any carrier's web site recently? Tons of $0 full-featured Android smartphones, and tons of apps for sale (subsidized by service fees, of course). We're already there.
- martinced 14y ago
  You conveniently left out that there are way more $$$ smartphones and tons of apps for FREE. Even inside walled gardens. Not to mention the desktop and laptop space where you buy your hardware (and OS if you're not using a free one like Linux) but then there are a lot of free apps.
- narcissus 14y ago
  I guess when I read it I didn't think "hardware is free as in you'll be paying for a contract of service where the cost of that service includes the cost of the hardware". I mean, if we're to be able to redefine 'actual' costs like that, maybe my house is free... it's just included in the cost of my bank sending me a statement every month. I do see your point, though: it definitely seems that way, but surely nobody can argue that the production cost of one more piece of hardware is more 'free' than that of a piece of software.
- sesqu 14y ago
  The entertainment market is another good example of what he might have been thinking of. Many games consoles and video devices have been sold at a loss, though it's obviously a greater gamble than selling payment plans disguised as service.
edraferi 14y ago
This is not ridiculous, it's the definition of Software as a Service. There are two main factors at play: 1) Cost of reproduction (copying) 2) Value to end user Hardware has historically been harder to reproduce because it's physical. This gap is closing as hardware becomes a commodity. You don't need a server anymore - just spin one up on EC2. Need chips? visit a Chinese bulk electronics markets and buy them by the scoop. Software provides more value to the end user because it makes the hardware do something. People pay for great software because it cleverly moves information around to meet their needs. You still need hardware to run it, eventually, but it becomes dramatically less important. The servers that power your webmail are entirely abstract to an end user. Angry Birds runs on basically anything. etc

bconway 14y ago

I read once where Bill Gates predicted that eventually people would buy software and that the hardware would be free. I can't remember where I read it ('Business at the Speed of Light', maybe?) but it stuck with me as just, well, ridiculous. Have you looked at any carrier's web site recently? Tons of $0 full-featured Android smartphones, and tons of apps for sale (subsidized by service fees, of course). We're already there.

martinced 14y ago
You conveniently left out that there are way more $$$ smartphones and tons of apps for FREE. Even inside walled gardens. Not to mention the desktop and laptop space where you buy your hardware (and OS if you're not using a free one like Linux) but then there are a lot of free apps.
narcissus 14y ago
I guess when I read it I didn't think "hardware is free as in you'll be paying for a contract of service where the cost of that service includes the cost of the hardware". I mean, if we're to be able to redefine 'actual' costs like that, maybe my house is free... it's just included in the cost of my bank sending me a statement every month. I do see your point, though: it definitely seems that way, but surely nobody can argue that the production cost of one more piece of hardware is more 'free' than that of a piece of software.
sesqu 14y ago
The entertainment market is another good example of what he might have been thinking of. Many games consoles and video devices have been sold at a loss, though it's obviously a greater gamble than selling payment plans disguised as service.

edraferi 14y ago

This is not ridiculous, it's the definition of Software as a Service. There are two main factors at play: 1) Cost of reproduction (copying) 2) Value to end user Hardware has historically been harder to reproduce because it's physical. This gap is closing as hardware becomes a commodity. You don't need a server anymore - just spin one up on EC2. Need chips? visit a Chinese bulk electronics markets and buy them by the scoop. Software provides more value to the end user because it makes the hardware do something. People pay for great software because it cleverly moves information around to meet their needs. You still need hardware to run it, eventually, but it becomes dramatically less important. The servers that power your webmail are entirely abstract to an end user. Angry Birds runs on basically anything. etc