[Sussex] Giving something back

[Steve Dobson]

Geoff

On 06 November 2002 @ 10:17 Geoff Teale wrote:
> very disapointed to see that my company blocks my e-mails 
> from home because they are GPG signed - what the hell is
> wrong with that?

But you're using a system that wasn't written by M$.  That can't
be safe, they've told us so.  And it against freedom to innovate.
[Tongue so firmly in my cheek that is moved in next door]

> Steve wrote:
> ------------
> > You'll get this in any company.  Unless you're employed for 
> > what you have already done and are famous for it (like Alan Cox).
> 
> Which was part of my point.  This was an idealogical rant.

An ideology is great, it gives you a direction and a goal to aim
at.  But the road starts here in reality land.

> I don't expect to have a job like Alan Cox's but I still live
> with the hope that somewhere there are companies that don't
> reward project managers for agreeing to impossible deadlines
> and then try to make their staff achieve them - to my mind
> software project management is about managing something through
> an iterative evolutionary process.  This is something you can 
> read on in any Project management book, however it seems that
> no matter how many of these books projects managers read it
> always ends up like this:

<snip>

I think I can you your own experence to disagree here.  Didn't 
Rentokil adopt Linux as a result of an action you took (or was
involved in?).  I've work for a company that took a long, long
look at their development process and changed.  They went from
a procedure that was:
   1/ Analysis & Design
   2/ Code
   3/ Test
   4/ Ship
to
   1/ Analysis
   2/ Design a bit
   3/ Code a bit
   4/ Test that bit in isolation
   5/ Intergrate with other bits
   6/ If not finished goto 2 (Shoot me I'm using gotos)
   7/ Ship
New (case) tools were introduced.

The first major intergation phase (6 months into an 18 month
project) two (4-5 man) teams intergrater there software in
a day and a half.  Only one bug was found and that took less
than an hour to fix.

This project was trailling the new process and tool set.  The
other projects startted crying out for rollout.  This was very
closed source (military).  It doesn happen, just not that often.

However the big leason is to know how to fight you battles.  
Pick your fights, don't talk geek, but talk in their language.
 
> >    ... there is a lot of OSS out there that isn't worth much.
> > Enlightenment has been criticised for being poorly designed 
> > and coded. Rasterman, to name but one, is not a "professional"
> > coder but a graphics artist that expresses himself in software.
> 
> Yes, but:
> 
> 1. If it's bad, you can find out (and possible fix it).  My 
> point, a lot of bad proramming is hidden behind the binaries.

Yes I give you that.  

> 2. I think the average programmer would endevour to do their 
> best if their work was open to public scrutiny.

Not so sure here.  You, I, Nik and the rest get OSS way.  But
does everyone.  What if you don't care what programming you do.
Can you honestly say that you're doing the best coding now.  My
best comersial work is years old, do I like that - no.

> >I'm know there are some very good closed source projects that are
> >well written -  I've written some of them.  Don't paint all closed
> >source with the same sh*t that is brushed on your current bug bear.
> 
> OK, fair enough. I agree.  I'm not saying that all closed 
> software is bad - I too have worked on some very good projects and
> am aware of other ones.

> What I am saying is that customers cannot be sure of the 
> quality of software
> that is closed source.  It's not just a matter of whether it 
> runs or not (
> my companies product certainly runs ) but also how easy it is 
> to maintain.

I think customers can tell.  They can test it as see if it does
wat they need it to do.  If it passes it is of a good enough 
quality.  Sometimes the Quick and Dirty solution is the most 
approprate for that time. QDOS got M$'s foot in the IBM PC door.
Was is the best OS available at the time (no CPM was king on that
size of machine).
 
> >I doubt you could do all you claim.  Good code is refactored as
> >new ideas and expereace come to play.  The INSIDE code I published
> >a while back I'm quite proude of - but it will be improved (a lot)
> >by me.  It's just a pity that I don't have time time at the moment.
> 
> :)  OK OK, it's a major exageration driven by my 
> exasperation.  Really I'm just frustrated by the utter waste of my
> skills.  This place seems to jump from giving me stupidly trivial
> tasks (and sending me on courses to teach me about "if" statement
- no really!) to being disapointed that I can't deliver
> the impossible on a 2 week timescale.

But that is just bad luck (the loss of the Linux contract) and poor
timing (the current job market position).  If the job market is 
active then you don't have to stick at a job you hate.
 
> >OOS allows others to added their good ideas.  The ego of the
> >original has to be suppressed in the light of this.
> 
> Agreed.  To my mind this is a Good Thing tm.  Programmers 
> need to learn to relax about their code - we all get awfully
> defensive of our code when other people get involved.

Speek for your self.  One of my first reviews cirtised me for 
digging in my heals and defending my position (see my other posts
on the nets).  But they also said that when it was proved wronge
I would switch camps so fast there heads would spin.

But I was green in those days I had to fight my battles hard.  Now
I'm older and wiser.  I pick my battles and I now have the benifit
of experence.  I am all listen more and don't fight on every issue.
If there way is just as valid then I can work that way - why not?

> >It's not just there.  Alan Cox and Stephen Teewlie are good examples
> >here.  Remember we here about the best (and the worst) by the average
> >is just to common to get a look in.
> 
> 1. Alan Cox works for a US company who let him work in the UK.
> 2. Alan Cox works for a purely LINUX orientated company and 
> orks on the
> kernel - this is not what I was talking about.
> 3. I agree that the average is not what I am describing - but 
> I am talking
> about change.  I'm dealing in ideals - I don't think this 
> will happen, I
> said I can't believe big British business can adapt and I know it will
> suffer for it.  There is only so far humans will be pushed in a bad
> direction before they _make_ things change.  I think Nik is 
> right when he
> says it will change when people set out on their own and 
> *make* it change.

It is a basic problem that people resit change.  I've been on courses
about this.  Isn't this the root of your rant?

> >Okay - I take the point - but even abroad these are the 
> excpetions not
> >the rule.
> 
> Yup.  I'm not going to suggest that anywhere is perfect.  
> From my myopic
> perspective however, the UK seems particularly bad in this respect.
>
> >I do think that there is something fundamentally wrong with British
> >Management.  It's summed up with the phrase: "Promoted to your level
> >of incompetence."
> 
> I think we beat the ideas out of these people.  Promotion 
> tends to come from
> towing the company line - not from innovation or even success 
> - this is what
> I mean when I talk about rewarding mediocrity.

I will agree if you mean that "following the hurd" get a job done.
If the task is to "get e-mail to every nurse & doctor in the NHS" 
then rolling out Outlook in the time frame set looks like a job
well done to those higher up with even less technical knowledge.
 
> >Not true; there are may examples where this is not true.  Lotus and
> >Morgan in the car industry, Dyson in white goods.  But I do agree
> >that most big companies are stuck in the mud.  But isn't that true
> >of the US too.  Look at the DMCA.
> 
> These companies are exceptions as you say, they are marked by being
> craftsman led manufacturers and valuing quality above pretty 
> much anything
> else.  A lot of companys talk that talk, these are examples 
> of those that
> walk the walk.  Dyson is a good example of a company that is thriving
> despite the British attitude.  Hoover (who once turned down Dyson)

Did know know that (one of) the reason(s) they turned him down is they
had a good profit margin on the paper bags?

> now
> suffer a legal battle because there very survival required 
> them to illegaly

Alleged surl?

> copy his designs.  Here we see innovation and change driving 
> a market -
> almost every British business would act in the manner Hoover did.

> >I'm not sure I can fully agree with that.  Do IBM really get
> >Open Source?  No.  Why?  They have not given up Software
> >Patience.  There are many companies wanting Linux and they're
> >just responding to that business need.  IBM, SGI, Sun etc can
> >lenience software for no fee as they sell hardware.  The 
> >software is the vehicle for selling hardware.  Also the
> >projects turned over to OSS are old hat by then (NFS).
> 
> Hmm.. well Apache2 gained a lot by having several developers 
> employed by IBM
> working full time on the project - Gnome2 and OpenOffice both 
> had the same
> from Sun.  These are relevant, new projects.  We all benefit 
> from them (yes
> they could have been developed without these people, but it 
> would have been
> a longer slower process) and IBM and SUN "get it" enough to 
> realise it is
> worth there while to behave in this manner.

But IBM's HTTP going no-where and they needed a platform to
launch WebSphere?

Scott McNealy stated publicy that Sun would "never" go Motif,
and then it because the standard.  Gnome2 getts them a better
looking GUI and away from Motif.

OpenOffices is just another weapon in Sun's war against M$.

> Yes they are commerically
> driven but the realise they have to give to recieve and that 
> this activity
> raises there profile in the community and helps ship 
> WebSphere,DB2, LX50's
> and Sun ONE as well as Apache and Gnome.  In this respect they are no
> different to Nik - yes his reasons may be more noble, but 
> ultimately he is
> exploiting Open Source software for commercial gain.  Nik, 
> Sun and IBM all
> also give back in order to support this.

If we take Nik at his word (and I do) he
  Want's to promot Linux and has found a way to make a living doing that.
  Sun/IBM... are purly profit driven (Nasdac) OSS is a vechele to that.
This are not the same.
 
> >True.  If a project can show a profit in five years its canned.
> >Same is true of US.  (But not Japan).
> 
> Yes.  The USA has the same problems as we do - but they do have an
> investment culture where start-ups are concerned - silicon 
> valley would not exist without it!

But look at the sign aways some have had to give away to the VCs to
get their hands on the case.  Offen the idea has to be signed over
to the company and 51% of the stock is owned by the VC.  The VCs are
in it for the money - nothing else.

<snip>

> >If you want to go to somewhere were they are allowing thinking out-
> >side the box then it looks like S. America, Africa, India or China.
> >But they'll try anyting to catch up to the rich west.
> 
> ..and eventually they will surpass us.

Yes the point I was trying to make.

>                                        Again, this is the point I was
> making, we are on the slippery slope and only a change in attitude can
> change that.

And my point is (again) People resist change.  Only when your a long
way behind do you think the unthinkable.

> >At the moment I think that the UK and US software engeers are better
> >value for money (less bugs per line of code) than India and other
> >3rd worlders.  But that will change.  Sure India is cheeper but as
> >I have said elsewhere engineer costs are not that significult.
> >As the quality of the workforce improves so to their salaries.
> >Look at Twain, or better yet Japan, as an example of this.
> 
> THat makes sense - but it doesn't stop more and more companys shipping
> technical roles out of the west and into the east - the 
> people making the
> decisions are accountants, not IT people, not craftsmen.

True, I've been the victum of "There's not money left in that budget for
this year".  So they pay me more in wages to do the same job.  Somehow
accountants thinks this works.  I don't get it.

> >If you want to be paid to develop software you have to work within
> >the company structure.  That is a fact of life; live with it.
> 
> Indeed... ...and 'deed I do.  But if we don't strive for 
> something better it will never happen.

Very true.

> When I see the hours people work these days, in order to
> make enough money to put down a deposit on a ridiculously 
> prived house, I am
> reminded of the workshops and factories of the 17th century 
> through to the
> early 20th century.  Ultimately unions rose to smash the 
> effects of rampant
> capitalism - the rich getting richer and everyone else 
> working harder to
> sustain this can only go on for so long.  Every year the 
> average working day
> increases by a few minutes - that cannot continue for ever.  I think
> adoption of Open Source comes hand in hand with a different 
> attitude to
> business.

With this I agree

> Has anyone here read the book "The Hecker Ethic" - it makes 
> the point far more elequantly than I could.

Most books do.  If we could write the elequantly we wouldn't be
camping on the mailing list but writing our own books for the 
rewards.

> >There are many who start "companys" on a new idea and many fall
> >by the way side.  Those that make it we get to hear about.  Those
> >that don't are never heard of.
> 
> Yes.  There are thousands of companies trudging along as well 
> without ever
> making it big.  There is a lot fo risk in changing or 
> starting up, but there
> is equal risk in staying static while the world overtakes you 
> or worse still
> deriving growth by squeezing more and more out of fewer 
> resources.  Rentokil
> Initial is a fine example of a huge company that nearly fell to pieces
> because it followed the later strategy for 20 years. 

Yup.

> >Of the many small computer software companies being run out of a
> >small office or room back in 60s & 70s few made it biggest; I 
> >wouldn't want to work for most of them.
> 
> Interestingly there was an aticle recently that discussed 
> what made the
> likes of Sun and indeed Microsoft succesful where other companies that
> looked very promising failed.  The common factor is apparantly that
> succesful companies are still run by their geeky founders who 
> understand
> their market and maintain the good spirit of the company.  Unsuccesful
> companies usually come under to much influence from venture 
> capitalists and
> banks who bring their cronies onto the board and start 
> applying MBA business
> administration to the companys.  They kill of R&D and 
> innovation and destroy
> company culture.

But that gets them the return on their investment that they are looking
for.  They not in it to create start ups that inovate and change the
world.  They are looking for a return on their investment.

> >See above.  I know the general note of my reply is doom and gloom
> >(must like your posting) but I have come to the conclusion that if
> >you want to do something different you need to strike out on your
> >own (or with a few like-minded individuals).  Success is not 
> >guaranteed. To quote from "Dune":
> >  "They tried and failed?"
> >  "They tried and died!"
> 
> :) Nice..  It's scary but I think it is ultimately going to 
> be the way to go.

And I wish I'd had the balls to do it.  That is why Nik gets my
admiration.

> >If you do go it alone that brings its own set of problems and 
> >restuctions.
> 
> Your telling me !

Yes I was wasn't I ;-)

> [2nd e-mail starts here]
> > I think you're missing a big part of this process.  Big 
> > companies can lobby Parlement to pass laws in their favour.
> 
> *Yay* - true cynicism.  So can collaborative groups of small 
> companies.
>  
> > But we as voters have a bigger power (on mass) we vote the
> > PMs into the house!  But do we do anything on mass?  Rally?
> > Write Letters? No!!!!!
> > <snip>
> 
> Agreed,  we're politically apethetic - I wonder how people 
> will react when we realise our pensions are increasingly
> worthless and we're all going to live out our days in poverty
> whil company directors and big investors grow fat on the money
> they pulled out of our pockets.

My cynicism chip is on overdriver.  I think government will increase
the retairment age until a balance is reached that the workforce 
can support the non-workers.
 
> > And I for one thing that you have an idea that will work, and 
> > provide a living.  I would like to follow you're lead, or jump
> > on your wagon.
> 
> [AOL mode] Me too! ;)
>  
> > But as the busness grows so you will be able to support developer
> > in those areas where it make sence.  Did RedHat start with a pool
> > of developers, or did they get them to add "power" to their sales.
> > "Look at use we have this may Linux Kernel Hackers!!!!"
> 
> Yay.. now you're getting what I was saying all along.

I never thought that we were that far apart.  Just our angle of atack.
  
> > See my other posting - but I think that number is a small 
> > number over all.
> 
> Agreed, but it is at least there.  Here we are devoid of such 
> companies and organisations and that makes me sad.

Me too, until I find my way.  And then I can look back and laugh.

Steve