Archive for Emerging Tech

The Future of Software Development, Part II

// February 22nd, 2008 // 1 Comment » // Emerging Tech

The coming disruption the big software companies are blind to…

In my last post, I laid out the reasons as to why software development was about to experience a serious disruptive force. I made the argument that open source software, while highly valuable, couldn’t continue to try to live outside the economic realities of our real world lives. But OSS has obviously worked: look at the successes we’ve seen to date. And I concede the point. However, I believe that OSS has been able to carve out a niche because there have, up until now, been no viable alternatives. And that may actually be changing…

Enter SaaS Marketplaces, Collaborative Development Environments, and The Future.
Which is where SaaS marketplaces enter the picture: what if there were online environments where developers could create, collaborate, and connect? What if they could have a central “hub” which allowed them to connect with potential employers? What if they could collaborate on common components, assemble those components into larger entities (i.e. applications), then sell those applications (or utilization of those applications) and…and here’s the kicker…actually be compensated for their work. Imagine if you leveraged the freedom of OSS and at the same time appropriately compensated developers for their effort. Afterall, the value developers creates far exceeds that which an assembly line worker back in the 50’s contributed to the overall profits of a corporation—one developer has the potential to significantly contribute (or, conversely,  redact) from the bottom line. The problem with corporate software development, today, is that it is actually setup to discourage exactly the very kind of contributions which could have significant impact (where’s the incentive for the developer?)

“Rather than tie themselves down to a specific job with a specific company, instead developers will become software development consultants—bidding on projects, winning projects, and executing on them when they are hired by clients.”

Now for the Disruptive Part…
What’s most interesting is what happens when one considers the implications of a marketplace, as envisioned, above: software developers become, in effect, contract “mercenaries”. Rather than tie themselves down to a specific job with a specific company, instead developers will become software development consultants—bidding on projects, winning projects, and executing on them when they are hired by clients. Interestingly, this also has some nice side benefits: it allows the developers to sidestep the downward spiral of the “specialization” effect on their skill set, thus granting them a huge level of freedom (getting tired of working on back-end systems? Try your hand at GUI work, instead).  Developers can suddenly work on a diversity of projects, with a diversity of colleagues. Development teams would likely naturally form (as developers discovered other developers and team members that they like to work with), but nothing ties the developer to said team: they can decide at any point to take on an entirely new project with entirely new team members. This, in addition, broadens a developer’s professional network, exposing him/her to a much broader base of experiences as well as techniques—arguably making for a better developer in the end.

For the corporations, this actually works out too. Remember when we earlier talked about offshoring? In effect, should software development evolve along the lines stated, above, you’d have a kind of nullification of the offshoring effect: it’s not a matter of where it’s cheaper to house employees—it’s more a matter of who the best developers are—regardless of location. Sure, cost will still factor into the equation, but at least the playing field will be leveled in that companies will naturally value creative solutions which provide them the maximum of flexibility over the “cheap” solution. This means that a good developer—no matter if you’re Ukranian, Indian, Chinese, American, Spanish, or Dutch, would get the work. And for the corporation, it actually maximizes their efforts by most efficiently utilizing resources (read: money) spent on development efforts.

“…companies which fail to adapt to the new realities of software development will find themselves in danger of irrelevance. This new paradigm cuts out the middleman—and thus potentially could disrupt the entire software industry.”

In the end, it’s the application of marketplace economics on software development—something we’re already seeing in the form of marketplaces for web services (StrikeIron is a great example of this) and in componentized apps (widgets and mashups are another good example). If the market should move in that direction, it will pose an immediate and significant challenge to traditional software companies (IBM included): companies which fail to adapt to the new realities of software development will find themselves in danger of irrelevance. This new paradigm cuts out the middleman—and thus potentially could disrupt the entire software industry.

The benefits, however, far outweigh the potential negative consequences, assuming corporations are willing to adapt to the new realities. In essence, it’s nothing new, really: companies are forced to adapt to change constantly. The question is which companies will embrace this new model, and which will attempt to fight it? Answer that question, and you’ll know who will be the dominant players in the software industry ten years from now.

Add This! del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Reader reddit SlashDot StumbleUpon Technorati

The Future of Software Development, Part I

// February 15th, 2008 // 1 Comment » // Emerging Tech

Why Software Development Is Going to Disrupt the Software Industry

Full disclosure: I am a former developer. It’s something that I feel should be stated upfront, because it provides some insight into my particular perspective when it comes to the current state of software development. And, yes, I also work for IBM.

Setting the Stage
I’ll begin with what is not news for your typical software developer, today: software developers are not being appropriately compensated for their efforts by the industry. In fact, in many ways, you could draw parallels between what developers are experiencing today and what exploited workers have experienced in the past—working conditions which served to oppress rather than encourage, wages which were out of alignment with the actual value that the worker is producing, widespread discontent in the worker ranks. These indicators, I believe, are pointing to a significant realignment of the market—and is setting up the market for a significant disruption—one which could have widespread implications for any company employing developers today.

So, why do I believe that such radical changes are brewing?  There are a number of factors coming into play—converging, really—which have the potential to seriously alter the landscape: the first is the continuous pressure on software companies to reduce costs to maintain their traditionally high gross margins. Second is the advent of the Software as a Service model, as well as the potential for the evolution of marketplaces servicing those technologies (see SaaS: Still another acronym for Software?). Thirdly, we have the adoption of the collaborative development model first proposed by Grady Booch back in 2002. It doesn’t take much to see that the convergence of these three factors has the potential to provide the seeds for a marketplace disruption—not in terms of new and evolving technologies, but how technologies are leveraged by those creating the products and services which rely on them. Think of it this way: the impact of robotics on the automotive industry has reduced the raw number of automotive workers from their peak membership in the 70’s (over 700,000 strong) to the current levels today (180,000) in the US. True, there were a number of factors influencing this dramatic decrease (including offshoring), however, we’ll see that those factors may also influence software development, and in a greater context, the software industry as a whole—not by constricting or reducing the number of developers, but by changing the game, and in essence, liberating those developers. It amounts to be, in the end, a kind of revolution.

The Evolution of Open Source
So, let’s set the stage by first looking at the open source model from the perspective of software developers: why do developers participate in something that, literally, gives them no tangible monetized benefits?  The answer is: most don’t. The typical evolutionary path for an OSS project goes from: initial idea -> gathering of like minded developers to realize the idea -> implementation of the idea -> market validation (or rejection) of idea -> If validation, eventual commercialization. The path, in other words, leads to some sort of monetized, commercialized, software. We’ve seen this happen with innumerable OSS projects, ranging from MySQL to TripWire to JBoss. The intent may have never been to commercialize the software, but the reality is that once these projects reach a certain critical mass, in order to sustain them, a business must be built which has the capabilities to provide that support—that in turn costs money.

“This is something the software industry, for the most part, still hasn’t figured out—and rather than leveraging these inherent talents, your typical software company simply creates a rather ugly hole, drops the developer into this chasm, and then expects the developer to happily create what amounts to be boring, isolated, and intellectually poisonous code.”

The Corporate Cube
Why am I discussing this? Because it goes to a deeper issue: software developers are creative. There’s a reason why developers talk about “elegant code”. There’s a reason why the best coders are viewed as much as artists as technologists. This is something the software industry, for the most part, still hasn’t figured out—and rather than leveraging these inherent talents, your typical software company simply creates a rather ugly hole, drops the developer into this chasm, and then expects the developer to happily create what amounts to be boring, isolated, and intellectually poisonous code. Why do you think “cube cities” are so despised by the developer? It’s a physical manifestation of what software companies do to the developer’s professional career.

“there’s been one significant barrier to OSS really disrupting the existing corporate software paradigm: it doesn’t pay. Literally and figuratively.”

OSS has succeeded to the extent that it has largely because it provides a necessary safety valve: it’s a channel by which the developer can break out of the “cube” of commercial software development, and actually exercise the skills and creativity that drove the developer to start writing code in the first place: it’s a kind of intellectual freedom. However, there’s been one significant barrier to OSS really disrupting the existing corporate software paradigm: it doesn’t pay. Literally and figuratively. Without the ability to put “food on the table”, the switching cost for a developer to move from commercial development (which he/she hates) to OSS development (which they obviously prefer given that the rewards are initially so minimal) are simply too high. It’s not just economically feasible.  The time is ripe for a solution—and I honestly believe it’s an inevitability rather than a pipe dream: this change will occur, it’s just a matter of when it happens.

All of which we’ll examine in my next post...

Add This! del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Reader reddit SlashDot StumbleUpon Technorati

SaaS: Still another abbreviation for Software? Not exactly.

// January 15th, 2008 // 1 Comment » // Emerging Tech

SaaS is more than just an acronym. It’s a new way of thinking.

Software as a Service. SaaS. What exactly is it? And why are companies starting to pay so much attention to it? We’ve heard about the predictions of SaaS being a US$ 10+ billion market by 2009. But we’ve all heard such predictions before. If you’ve just become comfortable with the concept of “Web 2.0”, you’re probably wondering what SaaS is, why you should care about it, and what its implications might be. It turns out that SaaS has the potential to significantly alter the landscape of the software industry—but we’ll get to that later. First, let’s figure out what SaaS is all about.

Software as a Service, today.
Sometimes it helps to start with a definition. Wikipedia’s is as good as any:

“Software as a service (SaaS) is a software application delivery model where a software vendor develops a web-native software application and hosts and operates (either independently or through a third-party) the application for use by its customers over the Internet. Customers pay not for owning the software itself but for using it. They use it through an API accessible over the Web and often written using Web Services or REST. The term SaaS has become the industry preferred term, generally replacing the earlier terms Application Service Provider (ASP), On-Demand and “Utility computing”.

Which is a long way of saying that SaaS represents a shift away from the traditional software model of packaged software distributed with some kind of media such as DVD or CD, that is sold on a per unit basis (whether by seat or by box), to a new model in which software is sold as continuous service distributed through an online mechanism (either via a Web interface or as online downloads). Taking a cue from the Wikipedia entry’s note on Utility Computing, albeit with a different bent: think of SaaS as the difference between buying gas at the gas station, or paying your electrical utility bill: you pay for the energy consumption either way, but one is a continuous stream to your home, the other is by the gallon (or liter) for your car.

“…think of SaaS as the difference between buying gas at the gas station, or paying your electrical utility bill: you pay for the energy consumption either way, but one is a continuous stream to your home, the other is by the gallon (or liter) for your car.”

You may have noticed that the definition of SaaS specified two components: the first is the way the consumer acquires the software, the second is how the consumer uses the software. This distinction has caused some confusion. The two concepts are related, but may seem to be separate issues at first glance. So, let’s clarify the two components by first looking at each separately, then explore how they relate to each other.

Acquiring SaaS applications
SaaS at first was typically described by its nature as a digital distribution mechanism for software. Rather than talking about how a SaaS application is used, this concept simply differentiates SaaS from traditional software in terms of how the software is distributed. Traditional software is typically considered “packaged” software. In other words, the software is distributed on some physical media. SaaS eliminates the physical aspect of distribution and offers software as online digital downloads.

Using SaaS applications
However, people soon realized that SaaS really was much more: the central concept is that SaaS applications actually run as online applications, essentially making the software available anywhere at any time. This is typically achieved by creating Web front-ends for applications, thus allowing anyone with a browser to access the SaaS application. But traditional software (software that you install on your computer) can also fit within this model — with one twist: the software must be available for download online, which means that theoretically you can use the software from any machine, as long as the software supports the operating system on the machine you’re using. There is a hybrid model in which a “thin client” is downloaded to your machine, which then leverages data that lives on a server via a Web service or via REST. OK, perhaps we’re getting too into the details: suffice it to say that without a network connection, you can’t use a true SaaS application.

“I typically describe SaaS as the ‘networkization of software’.”

How acquiring and consuming SaaS applications relate to each other
In truth, one begets the other: online distribution naturally leads to online consumption of data, and the converse is also true: consumption leads to online distribution of data or application components. Both rely on network connectivity — whether to acquire the software, or to actually use it. The bottom line: I typically describe SaaS as the “networkization of software”. Yes. You’re just witnessed a Spencism: networkization isn’t a word you’ll find in the Oxford English Dictionary. But then again, how many emerging technology terms are?

Why you should care
So, why is everyone suddenly talking about SaaS? Well, take a moment to consider the implications:

For the software companies and consumers there are huge benefits to the SaaS model:

1. Reduced costs. Consider the amount of money companies will save by not having to distribute physical copies of their software. No more printing costs. No more box costs. No more printing of manual costs. In fact, for the supply chain aficionados in the crowd: no more inventory holding costs. Bottom line: huge savings for companies, and in today’s hyper-competitive market, that will eventually translate into lower prices for you and me as consumers.

“…huge savings for companies, and in today’s hyper-competitive market, that will eventually translate into lower prices for you and me as consumers.”

2. Opportunities through incremental components. In the previous article in this series (PLS. INSERT CORRECT URL IN THIS LINK) regarding the impact of the gaming world on the software industry, we talked about something called “micropayments”. Basically, it was the idea of small add-ons that gamers can purchase for a very low amount (typically under US$1). Think about the same happening in your favorite application. For instance, think about a light-weight word processor that allows you to add only those features you really want at an incremental cost. The benefit to software companies: recurring revenue streams in the form of monthly subscriptions for those add-ons. The benefit for the consumer: the end of bloated, incomprehensibly complex, software that does way more than we would ever need (or want).

“…the end of bloated, incomprehensibly complex, software that does way more than we would ever need (or want).”

3. Instant market research. Since SaaS naturally lends itself to componentization of software, companies will be able to see virtually instantly, which components are successful (based on the number of people “purchasing” those components) and which are not. In fact, they can go one step further: companies can see how “sticky” the components are by monitoring subscriptions. For example, should a component sell wildly at first, but then not get re-subscriptions in  the second month, this might indicate either a quality control issue, a missed opportunity (the market is thinking your component does one thing when it actually does something different), or changing market dynamics. The benefit for the consumer: companies can react much more quickly to market demands—meaning quicker bug fixes, reduced time-to-market for new software features and functionality, and a wider variety of options. In effect, SaaS will force software companies to be more responsive to you and me.

“In effect, SaaS will force software companies to be more responsive to you and me.”

4. Expediency and ease. From a software company’s perspective, SaaS offers significant advantages in terms of scheduling (software upgrades and updates in response to market demand, not based on some arbitrary annual schedule), development effort (reduced risk due to instant market feedback, lower initial costs due to reduced development efforts for components, software better aligned to market demand, again, based on immediate market feedback), and from a financial standpoint (since there is no production lag between the completion of software and its release to the market, sales to revenue conversion times reduce essentially to approaching zero). From a consumer standpoint, it’s a matter of convenience: software is available when we need it, where we need it. Software that doesn’t meet our needs can simply be abandoned after one month at an incremental cost (which, by the way, also lowers barriers to entry and barriers to adoption for companies). In addition, SaaS represents a simple mechanism by which consumers can be assured that they’re using the most current version of the application available, ideally without having to constantly patch/upgrade their applications.

“…software is available when we need it, where we need it.”

Alright. Sold. SaaS has benefits. But what’s next?
Now that you know something about SaaS, and why it’s so valuable today, what might be the logical step in SaaS application evolution?

Collaborative Development: Not just for programmers any more
When considering where SaaS might be headed, the future of Collaborative Development looks particularly bright. You can find out more about Collaborative Development at  alphaWorks. The idea is that, by embracing a network-centric model, SaaS also naturally lends itself to connecting not just machines, but people. In this view, Collaborative Development isn’t just about programmers working together, it’s about people working together. It blurs the line between users and developers as the user community participates in the development cycle directly. The ability of SaaS to offer instant market feedback is a first step in pulling users into the development cycle. Web 2.0, in many ways represents another step. “Collective intelligence”, after all, is basically the distribution of work across a community, and leveraging that work and insights for the benefit of a particular application or company and eventually their users as well. Sometimes I jokingly refer to this as “Communal Computing”, but in essence, that does capture the underlying concept.

“…Collaborative Development isn’t just about programmers working together, it’s about people working together.”

The Lego effect: Building from common elements
Another result of SaaS may be a kind of “Lego Effect”. Basically, as market and financial pressures force companies to componentize their applications, these applications which will be easier to assemble, since smart companies will create common components and reuse them in multiple applications. In fact, this will naturally occur as the market will demand cross-connectivity of their applications due to the network-centric nature of SaaS. We see this now in the formation of Web services and REST applications, and can expect it to only gain momentum. Witness the pressures on companies to abandon proprietary DRM, standardization of music and video formats, etc. Another early indicator for trend is the rise of composite applications and mashups: both concepts revolve around the idea of reusable widgets and data. If you take this concept one step further and apply it beyond software, it becomes a case of what’s old is new again: imagine applying this concept to communities and ideation, for example. In fact, it’s something human beings naturally do, so we’ll see it replicated in our online environments as well.

“…as market and financial pressures force companies to componentize their applications, these applications which will be easier to assemble, since smart companies will create common components and reuse them in multiple applications… imagine applying this concept to communities and ideation…”

Massive, dynamic, marketplaces: The alternative economy is here.
When you think about it, one of the most striking (and logical) possibilities for the future of SaaS is the concept of massive dynamic marketplaces. Again, there’s a clue to the future in the gaming world: we’ve seen the rise of wholly digital, fully functioning economies in the virtual world. In fact, in some cases, those digital economies are connecting to our real life (RL) economies. SaaS naturally creates marketplace environments: micropayments require venues through which to sell the components which in turn requires economic systems to support them, which requires economic infrastructures to regulate.

Worldwide Software Spending
In effect, SaaS can lead to a true digitalization of the economic world (if it’s not halfway there already), in which goods and services are virtual, not physical by creating natural marketplaces (and eventual economies) which support these virtual goods and services. And this transition can only accelerate as the value of the virtual (information, basically) becomes paramount. We already see this in our traditional economies: software spending is estimated to be US$243B in 2007 and have a projected year-to-year growth rate of around eight percent annually. Virtual economies are growing at phenomenal rates, wjth some projections of 10 to 15 percent per month. While they are currently almost insignificant compared with the traditional economic markets, the impact of virtual economies will continue to grow, the line between the virtual and “real” economies will blur, until a total and complete integration of the two economies occurs.

SaaS offers companies an ancillary benefit: while initially SaaS may consolidate power in central hubs likely dominated by large industry players, eventually (as witnessed with software componentization) the standardization of protocols (remember, this is a network-centric model) will enable players to jump from ecosystem to ecosystem, further accelerating the already hyper-competitive nature of IT. Those companies who deploy appropriate systems, will reap massive opportunities, ranging from optimization and streamlining of efficiency to partnerships which previously were either not apparent, or difficult/impossible to create due to physical or technical barriers.

“…SaaS can lead to a true digitalization of the economic world (if it’s not halfway there already), in which goods and services are virtual, not physical by creating natural marketplaces (and eventual economies) which support these virtual goods and services.”

Summing SaaS up
We literally stand at the cusp of a new era in computing. While SaaS isn’t the only catalyst that will spark this new era, it is a key component. So, when you’re sitting down and either preparing to write that next line of code, planning your marketing strategy for the next quarter, or figuring out how to invest your company’s resources to position yourselves well for the future, keep an eye on SaaS: it’s not just an acronym, it may very well be a disruptive technology with significant business impact.

Add This! del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Reader reddit SlashDot StumbleUpon Technorati

How WoW is wow’ing the market

// January 3rd, 2008 // No Comments » // Emerging Tech

In an earlier post, I discussed how the gaming industry was impacting the software industry. Here we take a look at a concrete example of one game that has caught the attention of big business…

The most popular MMO, World of Warcraft, most often referred to as “WoW” by its community, recently announced that it had reached a benchmark of over 8 million subscribers, 3.5 million in the US and Europe, with another 3.5 million in China. Doing the math, and accounting just for US and European subscribers who pay the full $15 per  US month subscription, that will eventually equate to some $49M in monthly revenue for Blizzard Entertainment,, the company which created WoW.  And that’s just subscriber income. WoW periodically releases expansion packs which cost an average of $40 US per  unit. Blizzard  sold over 2.4M copies of its latest expansion pack in one day. For those counting, that’s $96M US in revenue in a single day of sales. To to add it up: if Blizzard  maintains just  its current player base, and if we only count US and European subscribers (Chinese subscribers pay either 1/3 of their Western counterparts, or by the hour, so it’s difficult to calculate the actual revenue figures from there), you end up with to-date sales figures of:

Unit Sales Revenue:
Base Game Unit Sales:  $175M
Expansion Pack Sales:  $96M
Total One-Time Sales:  $271M

Recurring Revenue:
Subscriptions (US/Europe):  $52.5M per month ($630M annually)

A new study by Screen Digest suggests that to date, Blizzard has realized revenues of $471M on WoW.

Now, consider this: in 2005, the gaming industry was estimated to have revenues of $32.6B. That revenue is expected to double by 2011 to $65.9B. For some perspective, that would be more revenue than the cinema, video, DVD, and television rights, combined, for all of 2005.

Add This! del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Reader reddit SlashDot StumbleUpon Technorati

Five innovations in the gaming industry today, Part II

// December 29th, 2007 // 2 Comments » // Emerging Tech

It’s not just fun and games anymore…

A continuation of my last post, we get to the last three of the of the five innovations which the gaming industry has lead.

3. Online gaming gets mature (ish)
Virtual reality is finally becoming something, well, tangible. It also provides opportunities that early SciFi writers like Aldous Huxley, Isaac Asimov, Ray Bradbury, and Tad Williams (to name a few) envisioned: fully functional worlds in which life imitates art…or perhaps more accurately art as life, albeit in a digital form.

You’ve probably heard of SecondLife. I was first introduced to SL back in 2003 when a friend of mine suggested I take a look. I soon found myself immersed in the SL community. After about two months, though, I began to think I was wasting my time in a game that wasn’t even a game. Some emerging technologies strategist I am — I soon left the SL community, writing it off as just another online fad. I’m sufficiently humbled now. SecondLife has been around for over four years—that’s a lifetime in the world of MMOs. IBM is investing $10M in its SecondLife presence. Sears, Circuit City, even John Edward’s Presidential campaign have established venues in the SecondLife universe. OK. I get it now. Although for some reason, I still question whether SL can continue to thrive as a lifestyle alternative. Then again, I never did get The Sims…

Implications
What I failed to realize in 2003 is that SL would mature into a real, functional environment, complete with its own economic system. Sure, we know that EverQuest was said to have some correlation to actual economies way  back in 2001since EQ’s currency’s value when translated into US dollars, actually exceeded those of the Japanese Yen and Italian Lira at the time. But what wasn’t so obvious is that virtual reality economies could translate into an economic model that would have a broader impact by reaching out to the “RL” (Real Life) world. It’s happening today. In fact, IBM, developerWorks, and yes, alphaWorks, are creating presences in the SL universe.

“…suffice it to say that virtual environments may act as yet another disruptive force within software development, changing, as it were, the rules of the game.”

But it goes beyond this one example: similar stories are popping up all over the online gaming industry: MMOs such as World of Warcraft, Ultima Online,and  Eve Online each have created a series of virtual universes which contain in one form or another functioning economies, societies, and even corporate constructs.

What’s the lesson? Well, we’ve already seen Collaborative Development Environments (CDEs) becoming a reality. What if CDEs evolved to exist within virtual environments? The implications are pretty impressive.  Virtual environments may act as yet another disruptive force within software development, changing, as it were, the rules of the game.

4. Artificial Intelligence (AI)
First a disclaimer: Before our Cognitive Science and AI friends become upset, we’re not suggesting that any game currently on the market has what academics (academicians? Hm will check K!) would call a “true AI”. However, that said, games actually offer tangible evidence of relatively intelligent systems designed to react to the actions of human beings, albeit in a virtual environment. In real terms, this means that games have become much more “intelligent” than in days past: a recent game called F.E.A.R. had opponents which would look through windows to see you, take advantage of the environment to hide from, and coordinate attacks based on everything from where the computer AI last “saw” you — or even where it last “heard” you. Innovations such as these (spatial and auditory awareness is a highly complex and impressive feat when one considers the technology and algorithms actually required to simulate real life environments) continue to drive the simulation of real life within games—and eventually to non-gaming virtual environments.

“…we will likely see these innovative AI systems becoming more widely deployed in every-day software…”

Implications
For software developers, imagine security systems which take advantage of AI systems to intelligently predict where hackers might attack the enterprise infrastructure, or which monitors in realtime network activity by “listening” for hackers and then reacts by coordinating defensive assets. Or perhaps a piece of business intelligence software that runs through a series of “what if” scenarios (changing the scenarios in realtime based on incoming data) to discover the best opportunities for a company’s specific project portfolio at any given time. On a more tangible level, IBM is already exploring utilizing some of these technologies to solve business problems including how to most optimally arrange components for audio systems in vehicles, for instance.

We will likely see these innovative AI systems become  more widely deployed in everyday software running everything from your home’s sprinkler system to offering suggestions for modifying your stock portfolios. Some aspects of these AI related technologies have found their way into some very interesting ongoing development efforts in software.  Autonomic computing comes to mind. However, as gaming AIs become more advanced (remember, game developers are usually operating with very real hardware constraints), we will likely see these innovative AI systems become  more widely deployed in everyday software running everything from your home’s sprinkler system to offering suggestions for modifying your stock portfolios based on your personal preferences, and risk profile — and adjusts for these attributes in real-time based on real-world events. So, if a coup occurs in a large OPEC producing nation, and the AI system, monitoring a variety of news feeds, detects this,  The AI system might suggest you purchase shares of your favorite oil company (and defense manufacturer), while rebalancing your asset portfolio to dump stocks for companies based in the country in question. At the same time, such a system might also monitor your health (in realtime) for potential health issues, optimize your digital recorder to tape shows which might be of interest to your particular tastes, all while ordering dry cleaning for your upcoming trip to the Far East.

Sound a bit too “Jetsons”? Believe it or not, such a system is not that far away. In fact, ”expert systems” exist which perform many of the functions described above, just not in an integrated manner). The future, truly, is now.

5. The dark side: H4X0rs leveraging these technologies
Don’t worry if you don’t understand what follows the colon in the above subtitle, you probably just aren’t a gamer or software developer. Haxors are hackers who use “hacks” –or manipulations of the software system—to obtain an advantage in game play. Wildly popular in certain gaming genres (online First Person Shooters probably have one of the highest percentage of hackers, with MMO ‘farmers’ representing another significant kind of hacker), it’s hardly surprising that hackers proliferate in gaming: human nature is competitive, and if an advantage can be gained by cheating, well, one should not be surprised that cheating occurs. The difference represented here is the scale at which the cheating can occur.

“…human nature is competitive, and if an advantage can be gained by cheating, well, one should not be surprised that cheating occurs. The difference represented here is the scale at which the cheating could occur.”

Implications
In a broader sense, hacking should be of concern as technologies, ideas, and concepts migrate from the gaming industry into the software industry as a whole: it wouldn’t take much to completely ruin an entire product line’s revenue potential should insufficient security be used in its licensing system. Take it a step further and apply it to micropayments within an online economic system, and you can imagine the havoc malicious users could wreak. Identity theft could also be simplified in some ways, as could manipulations which could significantly harm a corporate brand with relatively little effort.  These aren’t entirely new concerns: identity theft occurs often in today’s business world and numerous corporate brands have been damaged by Web site defacings. Yet the potential for disruptive activities increases almost exponentially with the new systems discussed in this article. Yes, as Huxley would say, it is a brave new world  — but it may also be the dawn of a dangerous new world.

Summary
These five trends may eventually emerge in the software industry, or, they may not. Nothing is at all certain whenever you talk about emerging tech. What is certain is that change will occur, and it’ll come in successively accelerated waves. The challenge is to see these waves coming and, as an old popular adage says: “Get in the game, or get out of the way.” In the end, however, the case for why the gaming industry is applicable to the software industry is straightforward. There are numerous examples of how it has already occurred, and many examples of how it may occur in the future.  If for no other reason, the potential impact of the current activities in the gaming industry on the broader software industry should be sufficient to convince any software company to keep an eye on the latest developments in the dynamic gaming industry. While not all of the innovations created there will translate into the broader business world, those that do may significantly impact the future of software development and business. There is a realization that’s starting to dawn about the gaming industry and its relationship to the business world: it’s not just fun and games anymore.

Add This! del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Reader reddit SlashDot StumbleUpon Technorati