Comments on: Software is frozen business

By: Marcel

Marcel — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:27:20 +0000

Rich, you’re right about Rails, Django and its ilk (we’ve used Rails at the RGJ for almost three years, and we just hired a Python/Django fan). They’re an essential part of a web developer’s toolbox.

But I wanted to focus more on this built-in allergy many businesses have against software engineers. You can generalize it into a bias against local developers in general and include designers as well.

By embracing design and development as part of their core, companies like Google and LJ World have become media industry leaders. And this is irrespective of their particular technology choices — it’s more of an overall strategy.

By: Rich

Rich — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:07:22 +0000

Marcel, I found your site today and liked this post.

A lot of this argument comes down to turn-key, but hard-to-customize software (Saxotech) versus hard-to-make but completely customizable homegrown solutions. Ultimately, I think the solution lies somewhere in between with Web frameworks like Ruby on Rails or Django.

(Disclaimer: I work for the really smart guys who made Django and Ellington.)

Naturally, you’re always going to need some training and some developers/engineers, but a good framework and a thoughtfully designed admin area (such as Django has) can ease the pain and go a long way in making your life easier.

By: Kyna

Kyna — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 07:35:58 +0000

Interesting post, Marcel. I don’t think this is quite the same thing, but your article has me thinking…

The non-profit I work for is small, but we are fortunate to have an Information Development Manager on staff who has created our database (in Access). The database she created is far superior to one of the “out of the box” solutions offered to non-profits for managing donor lists and volunteers. She is able to respond to our requests for changes quickly. We enter only information that matters to us, and get only the information we want without wasting our time on meaningless or repetitive tasks. Even small changes, such as adjusting the tabbing to match the order of our student intake forms, save time and make data entry less cumbersome for staff.

After years of using shared “staff docs” and spending countless hours searching for documents that are buried in folder, after folder, after folder, LS has decided to start using a wiki for content management. It’ll be interesting to see how it changes the way we organize information.

Software is like culture – it is so integral to our work (as you said, it determines what we do and how we do it) to such an extent that people don’t question whether a process is meaningful or efficient. It just seems “normal.”

I love the idea of changing my entire world view, or at least my desktop, with the help of a new breed of superheroes: Software Engineers.

By: Marcel

Marcel — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:11:08 +0000

Frank, thanks for bringing up Microsoft Office, which actually illustrates my point perfectly. Note that the product has an extensive API, accessible in multiple programming environments. Note that Microsoft spends a great deal of time and money in the design phase analyzing customer usage. This is why, for example, Excel is actually a great solution for ad hoc data analysis — Microsoft realized that’s how their customers were using it, and made those tasks easier without insisting they shouldn’t use a spreadsheet applications for database tasks. Your point about training isn’t quite on the mark, however — organizations could do wonders and save millions by using Microsoft Office to its full potential, but doing so would involve people whose primary role was to streamline processes using software: Software engineers. Training existing staff without changing their job duties is a recipe for failure, and past experiences along those lines is one of the reasons many organizations skimp on training.
This isn’t about the vendor — note that we’re not discussing the red herring of open source vs. closed source — this is about the product. If you don’t have full control over its customization (as in Microsoft Office, for example), then your business processes are too dependent on another company’s decisions. And if that product betrays some fundamental design flaws, as Saxotech does in more ways than the single example I mentioned, then your processes are hostage to someone else’s bad decisions.

By: Frank

Frank — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:38:00 +0000

Marcel, I think you have it all wrong. I’ve used so many different software packages that half of them are out of business. Open Source is more nightmarish in the long run than an “out-of-the-box” solution hands down. I’ve learned a long time ago that 99.9% of the complaints in software functionality, usability, and features are due to training issues. A lot of research goes into software development ( I even WORKED for a software company) and the complaints I hear from you are exactly like the ones we heard. No software, nor Open Source solution, is perfect. But get more training, REAL training, and I’ll be a month’s paycheck you’ll change your mind.

Open Source is good for ONE THING and ONE THING ONLY… PROGRAMMERS!! It’s something they will tout for years to come simply because it gives them job security. Once they leave, once there’s a debate between programmers, or any host of scenarios, you are SCREWED! Most software you can add your own scripting to help “customize” it. The explanation you gave about SAXOTECH is a perfect example. YOu can do things multiple ways, it gives you options, not all people work the same or in a way that you might think would be most efficient. You don’t HAVE to use separate paragraph boxes, but there’s a benefit if you want to, and there’s ways that you can accomplish this without doing it this ONE way.

I have a lot of years working on many many software programs, and there’s no doubt that TRAINING is the key. Don’t blame the vendor, they WANT to train you, it’s in there best interest for you to use and be happy with the many ways the software can be used. Blame your internal department for not thinking that Training is important, a COST center as you say. When was the last time someone got REAL training on MicroSoft Word, or even Outlook. I’ve heard so many complaints about these top programs used by everyone, but they make is so easy to use that many feel they don’t NEED training. I got training, and was AMAZED at the possibilities, issues that I used to complain about are now laughable because I got proper training.

Don’t blame the vendor, been there, done that. Get your company to provide training, you’ll get a lot more accomplished than complaining.