BEAME@MCMASTER.BITNET (09/27/86)
Speeking as the president of one of those companies out there trying
to make a living by selling TCP/IP code for PC's ...
As a developer it IS my responcibility to produce a product that my
clients desire and to develop new features and approches.
I have done just that, but I am afraid to market it. Why ? Because the
Universities will produce a public (or very cheap) version and have their
name behind it! All my time, effort and MONEY will be wasted.
What can I do ? Get a Patent ? That takes years, and the protocols might
have changed by than.
I ask you, what would you do if you wanted to sell such a product.
(Remember were a very small company)
- Carl Beame,
President
Beame & Whiteside Software Ltd.
259 Fiddler's Green Rd.
Ancaster, Ontario, Canada.karn@MOUTON.BELLCORE.COM (Phil R. Karn) (09/28/86)
This note reinforces an (only half serious) suggestion somebody around here made a little while ago on how to stop ISO/OSI dead in its tracks. First, write a full-blown implementation of their protocols. Test it, document it, do everything you can to make sure it's the best implementation around. Then give it away. Phil
leiner@ICARUS.RIACS.EDU (09/30/86)
Carl, The theory is that products developed in the R&D community (read universities) are not supported adequately for industry to rely on. Hence the commercial market is for an equally functional product that is maintained, evolved, supported, etc. It appears from your note that you don't buy that argument. I would be interested in your reaction. ----------
james@ZERMATT.LCS.MIT.EDU ("James William O'Toole, Jr.") (09/30/86)
From: leiner@riacs.edu
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 86 10:48:13 -0700
To: <BEAME%MCMASTER.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
Cc: tcp-ip@sri-nic.ARPA
Subject: Re: Peace fullness.
Carl,
The theory is that products developed in the R&D community (read
universities) are not supported adequately for industry to rely on.
Hence the commercial market is for an equally functional product that
is maintained, evolved, supported, etc.
It appears from your note that you don't buy that argument. I would be
interested in your reaction.
---------
Would anyone mind moving the discussions of commercial vs. university
product requirements to a more appropriate list, and off of tcp-ip?
Thanks.
--Jimron@celerity.UUCP (10/01/86)
In article <8609280050.AA11782@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> BEAME@MCMASTER.BITNET writes: > > > Speeking as the president of one of those companies out there trying >to make a living by selling TCP/IP code for PC's ... > > As a developer it IS my responcibility to produce a product that my >clients desire and to develop new features and approches. > > I have done just that, but I am afraid to market it. Why ? Because the >Universities will produce a public (or very cheap) version and have their >name behind it! All my time, effort and MONEY will be wasted. > > What can I do ? Get a Patent ? That takes years, and the protocols might >have changed by than. > > I ask you, what would you do if you wanted to sell such a product. >(Remember were a very small company) > > - Carl Beame, > President > Beame & Whiteside Software Ltd. > 259 Fiddler's Green Rd. > Ancaster, Ontario, Canada. There seems to be no way to avoid (for large or small companys) doing market research before doing a product development. I don't even think that patents would solve your problem. They certainly would work if you were trying to protect an original invention, but anything that is in the public domain as much as TCP/IP is, well, forget it. A possible device you could use to market a product for which there is competition in the public sector, is to do the job better than the public version. Presumably, you are using designers and programmers that are professional (not a wild-eyed bunch of unmanagable undergrads ;-) and you will provide support and subsequent product updates and DOCUMENTATION that are frequently not available for public domain software. An example of this strategy being sucessfully employed is the Ingress DBMS. I guess I do feel a little sorry for you, your tax dollars being used to subsidize your competition and all. Kind of makes you want to go sell real estate or something. R. L. (Ron) McDaniels CELERITY COMPUTING . 9692 Via Excelencia Way . San Diego, California . 92126 (619) 271-9940 . {decvax || ucbvax || ihnp4 || philabs}!sdcsvax!celerity!ron "Yes, my Precious. . . we hates them socket(2)eses!"
bzs@BU-CS.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) (10/01/86)
> As a developer it IS my responcibility to produce a product that my >clients desire and to develop new features and approches. > > I have done just that, but I am afraid to market it. Why ? Because the >Universities will produce a public (or very cheap) version and have their >name behind it! All my time, effort and MONEY will be wasted. I am not sure this is the right list to address this issue although I am not sure what the right list is. Apologies in advance. Your problem is ubiquitous to the software industry. It's caused by a conception of software as merchandise, a comfortable conceptualization in an economy that by and large likes to break things down into such catagories. Unfortunately, software does not fit that paradigm very well as you have discovered. It is closer to a service than a product. Recordings and books have various similarities, but in general a song by a particular artist is not easily replaced by a very similar song by a very similar artist, so copyright is effective. That is, software is too easy to duplicate and its function is fairly specific, thus my TCP program that I give away for free may very well wipe out your TCP program that you sell. I doubt too many people would like to have a recording of something that sounds a lot like me singing what might be a Michael Jackson song, or a story I've written very much in the style of Ernest Hemmingway (there is a contest however...) If one accepts the problem rather than fights it, one might come to the conclusion that the software should be sold for a nominal fee and the real product would be continuing support as a subscription. This most Universities have little interest in providing. It's probably not a bad business either tho perhaps not as trivial as sitting down, writing a program, selling a zillion copies and then never incurring another cost except that of copying floppies and mailing them out. You might actually have to work for a living! It's no wonder that racket has a few weaknesses although I don't doubt it would be (and has been) massively profitable. -Barry Shein, Boston University
olson@TCGOULD.TN.CORNELL.EDU (olson) (10/05/86)
In article <8609280050.AA11782@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> BEAME@MCMASTER.BITNET writes: > > > Speeking as the president of one of those companies out there trying >to make a living by selling TCP/IP code for PC's ... > > I ask you, what would you do if you wanted to sell such a product. >(Remember were a very small company) > > - Carl Beame, > President > Beame & Whiteside Software Ltd. > 259 Fiddler's Green Rd. > Ancaster, Ontario, Canada. I'd sell it for a LOW price if at all possible. You see i'm not going to get tcp/ip for the pc's around my department at $1000 a shot or even $500 hundred a shot. I'd rather go to the campus computing people and ask them to do the campus a favor and write something. At ~ $100 I might consider a commercial product. But (I hear you say) I might as well give it away. Well, If it is good you will probably sell a lot of them at the lower price. Also you can make money off of service. (not fixing broken software) Things like helping a group figure out what they need, hardware and software. That is a service you can charge for. But (I hear you say) We are small, we can't serve all our customers that way. Don't try. Let other service groups grow up to help people network (hopefully your software will be good enough for them to recomend) You can probably make a living off the people in your area by this sort of service as well as get ideas for new products from the problems you solve for them. If you write up very good documents on how to deal with these problems you could sell them (text book level pricing) and if you really have it together and can make your ideas clear and correct you can set up a service franchise. (Hello, you have our software, you are in L.A. what part? Okay, lets see, we have a service franchise at ... Why don't talk to them first as they will be able to devote more time to your problem. If you have trouble with them please call back.) The franchizee will report to you all problems they encounter with your software, and you will support them with solutions. You set standard for the franchice and in return for being certified they pay you money. This way you get all the feed back you would if all your customers called you directly without the problems of providing support once the problem has been solved. (Damn, there I go again, giving away my best ideas. But can you see it "Hey Ma, Dad, I need a job should I try for a fast food joint or a fast code joint." (so give me credit for the idea)) This way you can make a living with out having to become a corporate monster. Todd Olson
Margulies@SAPSUCKER.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM (Benson I. Margulies) (10/07/86)
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 86 11:13:42 EDT
From: olson@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (olson)
In article <8609280050.AA11782@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> BEAME@MCMASTER.BITNET writes:
>
>
> Speeking as the president of one of those companies out there trying
>to make a living by selling TCP/IP code for PC's ...
>
> I ask you, what would you do if you wanted to sell such a product.
>(Remember were a very small company)
>
> - Carl Beame,
> President
> Beame & Whiteside Software Ltd.
> 259 Fiddler's Green Rd.
> Ancaster, Ontario, Canada.
In the same spirit of free-enterprise that drives Mr. Beame, I don't see
why we should all be giving him @i(free) advice. Other people have made
quite comfortable livings commercializing things that were born in
Universities (um, for example, Symbolics), why is he any different? If
he is unconvinced of the pofitability of PC IP/TCP, let him go do
something else. Someone else will turn up with a different idea.
If he's trying to imply that @i(no one) will ever turn out a commercial
product as long as university freebies exist, he's just plain wrong. Go
ask wollagong.mckee@MITRE.ARPA (10/07/86)
I object to moving the discussion of commercial vs university requirements off of tcp-ip. The tcp-ip community needs to at least understand, and hopefully accomodate, the contending views of public and private organizations. The discussion should continue on tcp-ip. H. Craig McKee
ron@BRL.ARPA (Ron Natalie) (10/08/86)
Wollengong is a commercialization of University research. Their code is all based on the original Berkeley implementations. Not to say that they didn't do a lot of work to get it to run in hostile environments like VMS and System V. -Ron
ROODE%BIONET@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU (David Roode) (11/16/86)
Not only was the WollonGong TCP-IP fully dependent on the DARPA-funded Berkeley Unix implementation, but the port to VMS was done by Dave Kashtan at SRI who deserves the credit for the 'hostile environment' adaptation. -------