IBM has not given up on the Software Factory of the Future?

by Dennis Byron on December 12, 2007

It’s com­mon at the end of cal­en­dar years, to think back and think ahead. At least that’s the case at the end of Gre­go­rian cal­en­dar years when there is so lit­tle day­light here in the mid to north­ern lat­i­tudes of the North­ern hemi­sphere and noth­ing else to do but think.

As an aside, how come the political-correctness police haven’t elim­i­nated a cal­en­dar named after a pope (or at least renamed it)? And do peo­ple in Aus­tralia and Chile think “south­ern” is pejo­ra­tive the way left­handed peo­ple think of “right?” The guy who pro­motes this map must think so:

null

Which takes me full cir­cle to think­ing back and think­ing ahead.

What­ever hap­pened to the Fac­tory of the Future? GM MAP and all that stuff?

And what­ever hap­pened to the Soft­ware Factory?

Well on the Fac­tory of the Future ques­tion, Google didn’t turn up much writ­ten after 1990. I sus­pect it all hap­pened with a dif­fer­ent buzz­word a la the way articf­i­cal intel­li­gence is all around us but no one dares whis­per the term AI.

But I don’t think IBM (IBM) has for­got­ten about the Soft­ware Fac­tory and I think it wants to own the machines that run the Soft­ware Fac­tory of the Future. The Decem­ber 11, 2007 IBM announce­ments about new Ratio­nal capa­bil­i­ties is just an exam­ple. It means there are some legs in the soft­ware devel­op­ment tools mar­ket despite the open source soft­ware (OSS) devel­op­ment trend. While heav­ily fund­ing OSS as a tac­ti­cal move vs. Microsoft, IBM is really think­ing long term to the Soft­ware Factory.

A big part of my research agenda is OSS but I am con­stantly amazed at what a cot­tage indus­try OSS devel­op­ment is. I don’t mean it lit­er­ally takes place in homes per con­ven­tional wis­dom (in fact it is com­pletely dom­i­nated by IBM and other lead­ing IT sup­plier fund­ing) but it is still highly indi­vid­u­al­is­tic (which means full of errors that no one else can cor­rect because they don’t know what the indi­vid­ual that made the error was think­ing). That fact means that soft­ware devel­op­ment today is still fig­u­ra­tively where shoe man­u­fac­tur­ing was in the 1860s when my great grand­fa­ther beat leather around a last in what is now my sister’s kitchen. A gen­er­a­tion later his son (not my line of the fam­ily which is why I think for a liv­ing rather than make some­thing use­ful) founded Ply­mouth Rub­ber to make soles and heels with a machine. Is the soft­ware indus­try still a gen­er­a­tion away from automat­ing the man­u­fac­ture of its piece parts?

If so, IBM looks like it plans to be there. Of course, given IBM’s over­all busi­ness strat­egy of build­ing up its IT ser­vices busi­nesses and becom­ing more of a man­age­ment ser­vices provider you con­stantly have to ask whether it will spin Ratio­nal back out the way it has spun out PCs to Lenovo and so forth. You never say never but in the short term, the answer is prob­a­bly no. PCs had truly become a com­mod­ity. Because of OSS, soft­ware is almost the oppo­site of a com­mod­ity. Even lay­ers of the soft­ware stack such as application/web server soft­ware that I have dubbed com­mod­ity still offer dozens of choices. Ratio­nal devel­op­ment tools give IBM a leg up on every­one else in the ser­vices busi­ness in deal­ing with these choices. Almost every­one else in the ser­vices busi­ness such as HP (HP) and even in higher layer parts of the soft­ware indus­try is highly depen­dent on OSS for their tool­ing. Or, like SAP (SAP) they still have to build their own tools.

This recent Ratio­nal announce­ment tells me IBM’s ser­vices guys do not want to be caught sit­ting in a lit­tle shoe shop wait­ing for the leather guy to drop off a hide–Den­nis Byron

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: