Sftware as a Service

[CRoberson]

The idea has been around for close to a decade and I've thought about releasing software that way. It seems to be a reasonable idea
given that internet access is practically ubiquitous and becoming more
so. Also, it provides a solution for the software theft issues.

OTH, it is a paradigm shift that consumers will stumble over. Can it be better than what goes on now? Sure, why not? Isn't just a matter of
doing it right? Of course it is. The big question is how to do it right.

I never knew that Vas was thinking of it. Seems a bold step to leap where others haven't tried yet.

What made me start thinking about this model years ago? Simple: it was all the software theft that is going on. The current
model seems to be in trouble. Vendors raise their price due to all the theft and then consumers are pissed. Some claim
that leads to more theft, which leads to higher prices ....

Maybe a new model is needed. Shouldn't the developers have some protection from all the theft or are people more interested in all
the free clones that come from the current system?

Despite some ohter peoples claims, modern programs have algorithms and heuristics that weren't invented 30 years ago.
Sometimes we can use old ideas, but because it can be used. Sometimes old ideas get new twists that make them usable. So, its not just the old idea.

[DomLeste]

As someone stated at Rybka forum we need a comission or governing body to look through this problem of cloning. Rather then waste our time on the if's, but's and maybe's. You think a sport like Formula One wouldve survived today without dealing with cheats.

Thats what a governing body does makes the rules, regulations and judges on punishment. So we don't go on with all this trivial stuff. Governing body decisions are set in stone and thats the end of it rather dragging our feet for this long. We have all had our 2cents worth on this issue. I think we are running out on our 2cents worth theories to put into this bottomless pit.

Set up a commission of independant programmers and let them decide if its a clone or not. Well isn't that simple solution? Simple to say hard to apply

[bnemias]

The idea has been around for close to a decade and I've thought about releasing software that way. It seems to be a reasonable idea given that internet access is practically ubiquitous and becoming more so. Also, it provides a solution for the software theft issues.

It may provide a solution to software copyright infringement, but it isn't some magic bullet to generate sales. Not every infringement would have been a sale. I would even argue that the vast majority of infringements wouldn't be.

I don't think the idea of internet access being ubiquitous is valid either. There are lots of times when people aren't connected. Without some way of allowing access during times w/out internet, it simply can't work. Some of us have no intention of paying for wireless internet, and thus have notebooks and netbooks that are unconnected until we return home.

And customers will want to be able to use software they are licensed to run even in times when their internet happens to be down. I have yet to have an ISP that has managed 24/7 uptime for more than 6 months. Yes, it's not usually frequent, but it's a real pain to have no internet, and then as a bonus not be able to run non-internet things on your computer while you wait for your ISP to resolve the issue. If you are talking about production software such as CAD, you can forget this type of model. You absoutely must be able to operate it if the company link dies.

[bob]

The idea has been around for close to a decade and I've thought about releasing software that way. It seems to be a reasonable idea
given that internet access is practically ubiquitous and becoming more
so. Also, it provides a solution for the software theft issues.

OTH, it is a paradigm shift that consumers will stumble over. Can it be better than what goes on now? Sure, why not? Isn't just a matter of
doing it right? Of course it is. The big question is how to do it right.

I never knew that Vas was thinking of it. Seems a bold step to leap where others haven't tried yet.

What made me start thinking about this model years ago? Simple: it was all the software theft that is going on. The current
model seems to be in trouble. Vendors raise their price due to all the theft and then consumers are pissed. Some claim
that leads to more theft, which leads to higher prices ....

Maybe a new model is needed. Shouldn't the developers have some protection from all the theft or are people more interested in all
the free clones that come from the current system?

Despite some ohter peoples claims, modern programs have algorithms and heuristics that weren't invented 30 years ago.
Sometimes we can use old ideas, but because it can be used. Sometimes old ideas get new twists that make them usable. So, its not just the old idea.

It works for some things. But not for chess. how do you "reach" the service when flying across the country and you want to do a bit of preparation for an upcoming tournament while you have some down time? Providing a service means that the end user has to also provide a service to make the connection, and this is not always practical, or affordable. And it negates the idea of having a computer along with you. Should everybody just buy netbooks and the like from now on? What about performance? Providing enough horsepower to make this work also looks both problematic and expensive. Seems like a solution to a problem that has yet to be identified.

[michiguel]

The idea has been around for close to a decade and I've thought about releasing software that way. It seems to be a reasonable idea
given that internet access is practically ubiquitous and becoming more
so. Also, it provides a solution for the software theft issues.

OTH, it is a paradigm shift that consumers will stumble over. Can it be better than what goes on now? Sure, why not? Isn't just a matter of
doing it right? Of course it is. The big question is how to do it right.

I never knew that Vas was thinking of it. Seems a bold step to leap where others haven't tried yet.

What made me start thinking about this model years ago? Simple: it was all the software theft that is going on. The current
model seems to be in trouble. Vendors raise their price due to all the theft and then consumers are pissed. Some claim
that leads to more theft, which leads to higher prices ....

Maybe a new model is needed. Shouldn't the developers have some protection from all the theft or are people more interested in all
the free clones that come from the current system?

Despite some ohter peoples claims, modern programs have algorithms and heuristics that weren't invented 30 years ago.
Sometimes we can use old ideas, but because it can be used. Sometimes old ideas get new twists that make them usable. So, its not just the old idea.

It works for some things. But not for chess. how do you "reach" the service when flying across the country and you want to do a bit of preparation for an upcoming tournament while you have some down time? Providing a service means that the end user has to also provide a service to make the connection, and this is not always practical, or affordable. And it negates the idea of having a computer along with you. Should everybody just buy netbooks and the like from now on? What about performance? Providing enough horsepower to make this work also looks both problematic and expensive. Seems like a solution to a problem that has yet to be identified.

OTOH, you reach the power of cluster with your cell phone. Different business models can coexist to satisfy different interests.

Miguel

[CRoberson]

As someone stated at Rybka forum we need a comission or governing body to look through this problem of cloning. Rather then waste our time on the if's, but's and maybe's. You think a sport like Formula One wouldve survived today without dealing with cheats.

Thats what a governing body does makes the rules, regulations and judges on punishment. So we don't go on with all this trivial stuff. Governing body decisions are set in stone and thats the end of it rather dragging our feet for this long. We have all had our 2cents worth on this issue. I think we are running out on our 2cents worth theories to put into this bottomless pit.

Set up a commission of independant programmers and let them decide if its a clone or not. Well isn't that simple solution? Simple to say hard to apply

While your thoughts on a committee is plausible. I was considering the fact that this problem seems rampant throughout
the software industry. Software as a service provides a possible solution to all of the industry. It does have some issues, but I think
this is one of those "where there is a will, there is a way" things.

Your comparison to Formula One racing has an issue. They get paid! Every new program would have to be checked for cloning eventually.
That will take much time from a committee on all ifs ands and buts.

[Eelco de Groot]

Software as a service provides a possible solution to all of the industry. It does have some issues, but I think
this is one of those "where there is a will, there is a way" things.

Hmm, it is of course also the perfect "Cloaking Device" to hide what is going on at a binary level or even other types of computing, analog, quantum, cybernetic, who knows. So I would not call it a solution, and you might just as well call it another step towards SkyNet It is the direct opposite direction of Open source. I'm surprised nobody is crying foul about that but then again I'm not reading so probably missed all the threads

[towforce]

I'm surprised nobody is crying foul about that but then again I'm not reading so probably missed all the threads

You should read this thread, which is specifically about Rybka, but also covers general issues. One issue in particular is that if your program uses 3rd party software, then if you are selling your application as a service, you need only buy one license for it - whereas if you are selling each of your customers a copy, you will need to provide a license for each customer.

On this point, it is theoretically possible that in his service, Vas is actually using legal copies of other proprietary chess programs!!!

[Matthias Gemuh]

What made me start thinking about this model years ago? Simple: it was all the software theft that is going on. The current
model seems to be in trouble. Vendors raise their price due to all the theft and then consumers are pissed. Some claim
that leads to more theft, which leads to higher prices ....

Maybe a new model is needed. Shouldn't the developers have some protection from all the theft or are people more interested in all
the free clones that come from the current system?

I get the point :
so far, it has been the users stealing from developers.
You feel like switching the theft direction ?
If I buy software and it is not sitting in my computer, it has to be in my cupboard.
Otherwise the developer has stolen my money.

Matthias.

[towforce]

If I buy software and it is not sitting in my computer, it has to be in my cupboard. Otherwise the developer has stolen my money.

When you go on holiday, presumably you buy a car after you arrive, and sell it again before you go. You couldn't allow your money to be stolen by renting one!