who’s selling what?
I attended a mandatory “corporate kickoff” event two weeks ago. These things always make me wonder.
The company sells software development components and tools. As part of one presentation, the history of software development was recounted;
- once upon a time, there was host-based computing; one big computer with lots of terminals attached; this was bad;
- client/server came along when every executive had a PC on his desk, and was better, but still bad;
- the interwebs came along, ushering in the age of the ASP (application service provider), and this was better, but still bad;
- browser-based applications came along, and though very much like ASP provided solutions, were somehow different enough to warrant new development (and new tools), and this was better, but still bad;
- until finally, we’ve reached the pinnacle of computing models, SOA (service-oriented architecture); this is the best ever, 100% good, not bad at all.
Each transition is sold as “what we know now,” as opposed to “what we knew back when we were selling you that old stuff that we’re now saying isn’t good enough anymore.” I understand churn like this is good for business (at least the business of selling software development tools). I wonder, though, if the people pushing this line believe it?
Could the admit, if they don’t believe it, that they don’t? That they realize they’re selling ideas pushed by marketing as technological breakthroughs? ‘Course not. That would be 100% bad for sales, not good at all.
If they do believe what they’re selling, what does this say about their judgment, their knowledge of history and the business they’re in? They don’t look stupid. I’m sure they’re not stupid.
Who’s buying? Who’s selling?
