6786Re: [decentralization] Re: Mobility Architecture -- feedback
- Sep 6, 2004Lucas, on your question: there's a gaping hole in the market, which is
an understanding what all the bits and pieces are that are needed to
truly deploy mobile software. I don't mean deploying the equivalent of
the biorhythm software on a PC for those of us old enough to recall --
there was a real "market" for that kind of software at some point in
the PC's baby years (which is sort of what we have today on mobile
devices), but "real" mobile software. Before there is shared
understanding of what those bits and pieces are there is no fixing
them, and that's what we'd like to help with. (Your complaint about not
having a decentralized dev stack is another symptom of the malaise I'm
talking about -- there isn't even a centralized one if our list of
requirements is in any way correct)
Users, today, are spending about half a trillion dollars each year
(yes!) on their mobile phones. But the mobile software market is, well,
nowhere close. Is it because there is no need for software wherever I
go with my mobile device? [Personally, I doubt it.] Is it because the
devices are underpowered? [Opinions on this one may differ, but people
routinely buy digital cameras with an order of magnitude of more memory
than comparable phones -- go figure.] We'd like to help this market
along and hopefully win a slice of the opportunity.
If you read what most vendors offering technology in this space have to
say, in our view, it tends to fall woefully short of the full picture.
(But then, the beauty of having a public requirements document is that
those very vendors can comment on why they think most of our
requirements aren't needed). But if our still-growing list of
requirements is more or less needed -- and the public discourse in
places like this one supports this -- then at a very minimum, people
who want to make mobility real, people who want to make investments of
time, sweat, money, whatever, for whatever reasons, have a (shared)
point of departure. E.g. research still needed. Products still needed.
Assumptions that need to be proven. Open interfaces that need to be
built. Changes to the stack that need to be made. Etc.
Depending on how much or little input we get, we might change tack and
just forge ahead ourselves along the lines of "if the rest of the
market doesn't care what the real requirements are, the better for us,
commercially". But we'd rather collaborate, we'd rather forge some sort
of consensus, which better reflects our way of doing business, and the
opportunity is so large there's enough $$$ and fame and code and
whatever everyone's motivation is for all of us ... and we might very
well get there together first ...
Does this make sense?
>> What interests us (Joaquin and me) most is what impact these emerging
>> layers in the networking/communications stack have on software
>> architecture. E.g. the process of "create JAR, identify JDBC data
>> source, put on app server" does not really work any more ... so what
>> are the requirements that impact what the "new" architecture needs to
> A thing that I didn't understand from your requirements document is why
> this needs to change.
> For myself, I have to say that I despair about a more decentralized dev
> stack for mobile apps, at least in the short term.
- << Previous post in topic