Re: Future of IT in Lebanon

"BM" <m-e-d-a-w-a-r@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dopfri$s9l$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[....................]
>>>You can't separate developing and using. [..]
>
>> To your point: not necessarily. The bulk of the world's outsourcing (for
>> software) goes to India.
>
> Why? Because Indian programmers grow on trees? Because Indian DNA
> mutated so that new born Indians have pre-natal Java knowledge? Because
> India has the lowest per capita GDP? According to one source
> (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_gdp_cap), the honors goes to
> Cyprus (223), India is 143, Lebanon is incidently 121.

I have no idea how all the above relates to my answer, and I don't have
working knowledge of Indian programmers DNA, nor of their intuitive Java
powers. My answer was also nowhere related to *why* India the largest
in-sourcer of software development.

>>This outsourcing is all over the place, Windows, Linux, Java, .net, Open
>>Source, Oracle, etc. you name it. For the most part this is work for hire,
>>with no residuals. It provides daily jobs for a lot of engineers (one
>>third of the world's software engineers are Indians).
>
> And your claim that this not having any transformational effect on the
> society? That software production in India is not increasing software
> consumption in India?

I never made that claim. I said that a programmer can be using one
environment and developing for another. I have no working knowledge of
technology penetration into Indian society. Software consumption is also not
related at all to what might be more economically attractive to target for a
group of programmers. You were implying that a programmer needs to be using
an environment in order to develop for it.

>> I did not say this was about an experiement. This is about avoiding
>> engaging in an *experiment* when there's a real market to exploit.
>> Lebanon cannot afford to misstep in this space.
>
> So you recommend that Lebanese avoid engaging in an "experiment" that is
> successful elsewhere, because? So .net is not an experiment but J2EE is
> an experiment? So IIS is not an experiment but Apache is an experiment?
> So Longhorn is not an experiment and Linux is an experiment?

This answers my question above, it appears that there are additional topics
I did not bring up, that you want to discuss.

Let's start with Java and .net, here's what I said about them in this
thread: "developers our there are writing for Java (and a few for
Microsoft's .net)." In another part of the thread, I also said that if my
target is Web development, I would stick to Java. This goes counter to your
claim that I'm calling Java an experiment. You're also confusing the issues:
you don't program for IIS or Apache, you administer them. You write code
that will *may* run on top of an Apache Server or an IIS server targeting
clients.

As for Longhorn, in my opinion, it is not an experiment on the desktop, it's
another chapter in the Windows story, and the Microsoft marketing machine is
going to market the hell out of it. It reminds me of a cartoon strip ten
years ago (Dilbert). Catbert was sitting on top of a monitor and the caption
said: I just use this to stay warm, so I have no idea why I need Windows 95,
but the market is so good, I have to buy it. You may agree with Microsoft's
marketing techniques, its technical prowess, etc. or you may not. That
however is not the point here. It's about what makes sense for the Lebanese
IT industry to target, and given the numbers out there, I would say that for
the desktop, Windows (and Longhorn) will continue to blow Linux away, so
between the two, I would pick Windows, and yes, Linux for the desktop
remains an experiment.

How do I define an experiment? very easy. Everthing that's still under
development, has negligible market share, has not really broken out of the
realm of academia, is an experiment, in this case, Linux for the desktop
fits the bill. Linux in the server space, is not an experiment, but perhaps
you can tell me how you can make money programming for the Apache Web Server
(and for that matter the Microsoft IIS).

> What's the objective criteria for sticking an "experiment" label on a
> product?

See above.

>> OK, so you included just about everything.
>
> You left out anything that is open source.. :-)

Really, where?

>> This is not exactly a *lifeboat* excercise. For those not familiar with a
>> *lifeboat* excercise, it goes like this: my ship is sinking, and I have
>> very limited space in my lifeboat. What do I take along to ensure my
>> survival and the survival of my party? Every gram counts.
>
> Write a java program, deliver it on a website or on CD's. Java runs
> anywhere, the ultimate reduction of development cost over maximum reach
> ratio.

Great, I already said that if the target is the Web, then Java is the way to
go. Are you re-phrasing what I'm saying in here? if so, then OK. As for the
JVM, it may be an issue to you, but out in the market, it comes with
everything that needs it. Try installing a program that uses Java, and it
comes with an installer, mostly though, it's been downloaded to your system
already (now that Microsoft is not allowed to include it with the OS).

> Maximizes return on investment. Further, it gives you global
> reach as a bonus and you don't have to make any assumptions about the
> user environment except that the user has a JVM installed. If not you
> point the user to a site where the user can download freely a runtime
> environment.
>
>> If Lebanon has an infinite number of resources, and it can *experiment*
>> in
>
> Again, the condesending notion that anything open source is experimental.
> I see FUD at play (Fear, uncertainty, doubt).

Only in the sense that you're not reporting what I said accurately. There's
nothing experimental about Open Source. Open Source can be for Windows,
Linux, etc. The issue is about maximixing return on programming resources,
and at this point, there's no proof that Open Source does that. You want
proof? look at the commercial operations out there, and see who's making
more money.

>> an attempt to find what sticks, then by all means, let Lebanon's IT
>> industry take everythign thrown its way. I prefer looking at this a bit
>> differently: I have a finite number of highly skilled IT professionals in
>> Lebanon, do I use them as guns for hire, or do I point them in the
>> direction of creating *products* or *parts* of products, where they can
>> realize the best returns on their resources (royalties, direct product
>> sales, etc.).? My advice to the Lebanese IT delegation is that they
>> should become primary product sources, while taking one-time jobs only as
>> a last resort.
>
> My advice to them had I been there is not to taking anything off the
> table. Use all tools available at your disposal. Don't discard a tool
> because it is free.

Not even close to being related to something I said. It's not about how much
a tool costs, it's about doing it as a job for hire, versus retaining your
rights to it. Again, it's about maximizing return on programming resources.
Priority levels are sa follows: Own it, do it for hire.
[.....................]
> I am not sure we are talking about the same thing.. I am talking about
> localization (which includes translation). If a piece of software is
> gaining slow traction in a market because it is not customized for that
> market (doesn't not support local currency, dates, translations) then a
> localization effort can make a big difference.

This may be a problem in the Linux world :-) in the Windows world (and the
MAC), all the *locale* specifics are automtically done by OS services.
What's left is to take the resources files and translate them.

>> You can't build an IT industry based on translation alone and it is not
>> software development. Developers can take an Open Source product and
>> build on it, and that's great, but a couple of issues: i) They still have
>> to target an environment; ii) none of the products providing real revenue
>> to corporations today are Open Source.
>
> You mean real as in mega bucs? There is going to be a Microsoft size (in
> revenue) company in Lebanon any time soon so we are talking initially
> small.

See, I mentioned Open Source above (at least twice in this reply) :-) I am
not talking about a Microsoft-size company, but now that you mention it, are
you saying that Open Source is not going to be as profitable as
Microsoft-style? :-) but I digress, you don't need to be Microsoft-size,
what you need is maximizing your resources' economic returns, or income in
$s per man-year.

>> Lebanon has to go with what works today, and in the near-term to mid-term
>> future, and not *experiment*.
>
> I fine with in principle.. We disagree where *experiment* in your view
> becomes condesending code word for open source.

You're saying that I use Open Source as a synonym for experiment, which in
your opinion is condesending. A couple of things: 1) I am not saying that. I
refer to developing for Linux on the desktop as an experiment, not Open
Source; 2) experiment is not a condesending term, it indicates where in the
pipeline something might be. Within the context of this thread, it refers to
what can be proven to be a moneymaker, and given the need for Lebanon to
place its development sources where it makes the biggest impact, Lebanese
companies should not at this point *experiment*. At this point, I would also
call developing for .net as an experiment, versus Java.

[........................]
>> and a reminder to you also: a kernel is nothing more than a boat sink (if
>> it's attached to a computer). It's all about what's around the Kernel.
>
> Fine.. my problem is that, using your analogy, you should not call the
> boat sink.. call it boat :-)

My point is that the Kernel is completely useless, unless there are
applications and tools around it. This is the same argument I used to have
with people who were convinced that Windows will sell on its own merits,
with no applications to fill the ecosystem. At some point in the future (and
Google is leading the charge in that direction), the Kernel/OS (whatever you
want to call it), will become more anonymous, as the only thing that matters
will be the service, and that will determine the value of the OS. The
hardware industry also hs similar parallels. Today, I have to pay a mega
premimum for an Intel CPU or an AMD CPU if my goal is to build a desktop PC
or a business server, when in the gamong world. where Windows, Linux or
other Kernels/OS'es are not the primary issue, the CPU, which is far more
powerful than the desktop or server CPUs, fetches a lot less (check out the
specs on the XBox 360 or the upcoming Sony platform).

> Yes, it is about what's around the kernel. Here is an example along your
> line of thinking: you take a laptop, a projector and Powerpoint to a
> corporate meeting. These components are necessary to make a good
> presentation but to knocks the socks out of the attendees, you need to
> compose a good presentation. The presentation material is the stuff
> around the kernel. The kernel is the components (computer, etc.) My
> exagerated point is that you should not call the presentation a laptop.

Why would I call the presentation a laptop? It's actually not about what's
around the Kernel, it's about the application or service. The industry has
been working on making this whole kernel/tools, etc. paradigm go away.
Things like UPnP make it go away. If I walk into a room to deliver a
presentation, the laptop, projector, etc. are non-essential. As long as all
the parts plug and play with each other, practice mutual discovery and
setup, then I can do my presentation using my cell phone to recall resources
available to me over the web.

>> Here's some reading: The Open Source Monopoly:
>> http://www.galatea.com/opensource.html
>
> Thanks for the tip.. I added it to my reading queue.

It will give you some more details about RedHat as well.

>> How is producing self-booting CDs and DVDs going to help Lebanon's IT
>> industry, if the PCs in the are are still nearly 100% Windows and MAC?
>
> A) the media (CD/DVD) need the hardware to run (Intel, Apple) not Windows
> and Mac
> B) Exchanging documents within an office that has other Mac and Windows
> happens using open document standards
> C) Connecting to other closed-source machines (desktops/servers) through
> LAN is possible => no integration problem
>
> How it helps the IT industry in Lebanon?
>
> - localization leading to local markets (Lebanon, Gulf, etc. )
> customizations => complete packages
> - Gives the Lebanese IT industry a channel to distribute its wares
> - Made-in-Lebanon distributions developes a local technical skill pool
> that can be used in other contexts (outsourcing for example)

This may make Lebanese developers money, but it will only turn them into
employees of International companies. This is not what the IT industry in
Lebanon should be shooting for. Localization/Customization is a low-paying
field, does not establish original work abilities, and puts them in the same
category as sweat-shop workers.

>
>> The average customer (corporate or home) is not going to use this
>> product.
>
> It depends.. if copyright is enforced, corporates or homes face the choice
> of caughing up a fortune to stay legal *or* try one of those complete
> localized distributions that gives you functionally everything you need,
> maybe not as polished. What choice will it be?

I'm still not seeing an original work.

[......................]
> Optimal performance? Means what? What are the metrics? Who's taking the
> measurements? Who's interpreting the measurements?

[this has nothing to do with the main context, which is how to optimize the
use of IT resources in Lebanon from an economic perspective, but what the
heck, most of this thread is off into personal prejudices around what's good
and what's bad in the software and hardware industries]

The metrcis are simple: let's say I have a metaphorical snow blower, if I
run it directly against the snow, it will perform better than putting it on
top of truck and running a secondary mechanism to connect with the snow.

The world is finally moving in the direction of OS-independent web-based
services, and what you're suggesting will be something that runs on a
particular hardware platform, highlighting a particular OS. Web-based
services are no longer an experiment.

[..........................]
> Again, more condensending:
> open source = [defunct] socialism
> closed source = [brave new world] capitalism

You think condesending because you have an ax to grind. I said earlier in
this thread that I think that the closed source model is selfish, how more
condesending can you be? You insist on not seeing that. Why? Socialism is
about sharing, a good thing, but something Lebanon cannot afford now. It is
said that people's social conscience is directly proportional to the number
of Mercedeces they keep in their mansions. Lebanon is not there yet, and I
repeat that it should act selfihsly and go for a strategy that will secure a
unique position. Later, it can join the socilalist evolution, just as Sweden
did when it remained *neutral* during WWII, conserved its resources, and
later became the socialist powerhouse that it becamse today.

> In reality, open source is smart capitalism [somebody does the labor you
> reap the rewards].

Open Source is not the issue, it's the ability to develop a unique
application that guarantees maximum returns on investment, while retaining
full ownership.

>> Microsoft commissioned a study to monitor the effect of software
>> purchases on the local economy, and found that for every $1 spent on
>> Microsoft software, the local economy generated $8 in related services,
>> products, etc. I don't have a pointer to the study now, but I spoke to a
>> Microsoft person about it on Friday to make sure I can freely publish
>> this figure (and I emailed asking for a pointer to the study).
>
> Looking forward to reading the survey.

It turns out that the study is owned by IDC, so I'm not sure I have
authorization to post it. Microsoft did send me the original document (and
I'm not sure I have authorization to post the whole thing). Here's the part
that was mentioned publicly:

This project, commissioned in August 2004 by Microsoft EMEA, is an update of
the Economic Impact Model (EIM) and an extension to look at the specific
economic impact from software in general and Microsoft software in
particular. The countries covered include: Austria, Denmark, France,
Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, UK, Czech Republic,
Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Israel, Turkey, S. Africa.





Key findings



In the 19 EMEA countries examined, we found that:



a.. IT is a major driver of economic benefit to countries. Within these
countries almost 9 million people are employed in IT-related functions,
generating along with their companies, over $200 billion in tax receipts.


a.. In just the next four years the IT sector will generate an additional
2 million jobs and $50 billion in tax revenue.


a.. Over a third of 2004 employment and tax revenues stemmed from the vast
Microsoft ecosystem. For every dollar of Microsoft revenue in the region
another seven and a half were generated by other companies selling hardware
or software that works on Microsoft operating systems or servicing that
software.
If you have access to the IDC library at work, here's the report name: The
Economic Impact of IT, 2004 & Microsoft Contribution to IT Industry Growth,
2004 - October 5, 2004

[...............................]
> As I mentioned before after I retire a PC from Windows service, I install
> Linux on it :-)

And use it for what? anchoring your boat while fishing? :-) Not too many
people are in the business of running their own web servers.

> I know of embedded applications of Linux.

95% of embedded OS'es are Linux. Linux is invisible though and Linux is not
the target development environment. Examples: home gateways, Wireless Access
Points, alarm systems, HVAC controllers, Cable Set Top Boxes, etc.

> I think MS is going the embedding route for multimedia type devices.

If you mean what's referred to as PocketPC, then the answer is maybe,
depends on your individial point of view. If you mean set top boxes, then
what's below the surface is irrelevant, it's the Java platform that's the
*only* performance criteria. The only thing users actually see and interact
with (and programmers use), is Java. .net is not there (and I don't know if
it will ever be).

> In the case of Linux, the kernel between the embedded device and the full
> blown PC is the same. Can the same be said about Windows?

Strip Windows down to the kernel, and the answer is yes. For *embedded*
applications, what makes a difference is that Linux is free and Windows is
not, hence the adoption rate. Not sure Microsoft sees it as a loss either
seeing that in the target environment, the price allocated for the OS will
always be $0. Been there, and done that as an independent developer. It's
Java, Java and then some more Java.
[..................]
>> I don't have to leave the Excel or Word environment to write macros
>> either.
>
> Yes you do.. Starting from Excel 2003, record a macro, edit, a new
> application opens, Check the about, it says Microsoft Visual Basic 6.3.

Are you redefining what an environment is? The environment is Windows and
any application, from a programming perspective, whether it's VB, or
anything else, is a separate Window. The point is that you do not have to
leave the environment and the original application is still there, the whole
time. The whole point of your argument is that you did not have to leave the
environment, and I'm countering that you never leave the environment in
Excel either. The rest can be filed under you saying tomato and me saying
tomatoe.

> Now, why do I need to learn Microsoft Visual nonsense in order to program
> a spread*** macro?

Why do I need to learn other nonsense to program a spread*** macro? if you
call one thing nonsense then other things are nonsense as well. You see,
your application is a spread***, and a spread*** will let you do
calculations, with a set of built-in formulas. Simple macros require very
little knowledge of any programming languages, more sophisticated
*applications* require more programming knowledge.

>> As for looking up the syntax, go to the help section. As for intuitivity,
>> the simple stuff is pretty straight forward, the more complex stuff is
>> harder to do and requires programmin skills.
>
> Visual Basic.. last time I checked VB programming is a distinctive skills
> that people brandish on their resume.

Fomat, font, row, column, search? these are not VB programming directives.
You're confusing Excel or Word's internal lingo with VB. Here's a challenge
for you: you write a Quattro macro in Quattro's language, and I will
reciprocate by creating the same in Excel's Macro language and let's compare
the two.

>> It's funny you mention intimidations. This would be like saying that
>> Madagascar is in a position to intimidate the USA (in reference to SCO's
>> ability to credibly intimidate IBM, HP, Novell, etc.)
>
> Do you watch the Soprano's? It's fictionalized.. but the point is that
> the Soprano's intimidate not the entire USA but North Jersey.

As you mention above, it's fictional. In reality, the Mafia bosses are
rotting in jail.

> SCO try to intimidate users (not big companies) and at that users who
> don't have deep pockets. Anyway the case is going through the courts
> system and the truth will prevail.

Absolutely. I will wait for an outcome before confirming yeah or nay.

> [Side note, did you hear the verdict of the S. Florida professor accused
> of terrorism? Not guilty on serious charges; deadlocked on remaining
> charges. Point: truth prevailed.]

Yes, I did. Actually in this case, the government botched up the case. They
accused him of being the money bag and a major planner, in reality, he
*wanted* to be the money bag and planner, but his offer was not accepted by
the terrorist powers to be, so nothing illegal took place. Yes, in most
cases, truth prevails.

>> If I'm making some bad assumptions, then it's seems as if I'm not in the
>> minoroty.
>
> More than 60 percent of the American public thought that Iraq was involved
> in 9/11. Point: mass-hysteria does not make good arguments.

Not a valid comparison. There is no mass hysteria here. If I gave you a
piece of code, or an architecture, which do you think is more helpful? What
makes a better program? a better architecture, or better sub-routines? The
answer is obviously both, but a sub-routine rooted in a bad design is still
bad, no matter how good its code executes (part of the SCO case).

>> In any case, we're splitting hairs here, and this has absolutely
>> *nothing* to do with the IT industry in Lebanon. Minix, Linux,
>> Microkernel, minikernel, monolithic kernel, who came up with the idea
>> first, who copied it from the source code, or who used the architecture
>> only, etc. is all irrelevant, except when it may come to an endless
>> debate between two people coming at it from different directions :-)
>> [..........................]
>
> As long as you concede the point the point that Linux and AT&T Unix don't
> share source code [an argument yet to be proven by SCO in court] you don't
> have an argument with me.

As long as you concede that they all followed the AT&T base design, you have
no argument from me.

>> My point was that funding does not translate into resources, and that the
>> resources put on Linux development now exceed the resources Microsoft
>> puts on the development of the OS.
>
> Actually, as I mentioned before, I am in agreement that more people work
> on Linux than Windows (for comparable OS functionality). The difference
> is that the former don't get paid for doing the work.

It makes very little difference when computing the resources.

> bassem


.