You can go overboard in how quickly you might expect new technologies to transform people's lives. But I very much believe the way software is used, the way information gets distributed, will be dramatically different within 10 years. There is fire to go with all this smoke.
This was a big leak that WikiLeaks published, and it was hacking software developed by the CIA and the FBI that was able to leave fingerprints of other countries. So the CIA could hack our election to make it look like the Russians did it.
We want to have a diverse workforce that mirrors our customer base. Diversity of thought, we believe, is crucial to business success. We also are a tech company. And when we look at the skills that we need going forward, software engineers, electrical engineers, strong technology backgrounds, that's key for success as well.
We ought to be keeping in mind that the technology is not just hardware and machinery, it is also software. So you can think of languages of the technology and writing of the technology and the social justice of the technology in what social justice does is reduce impacts on the Earth because the most impact is from the poorest and richest people.
On a strategic level, employers really are behaving stupidly. Look at how they do recruiting: this automated process under which they will publish a job description chock full of so-called "key words", and then have software algorithms that attempt to match applicants to the resumes against those key words. So where in the key word collection do we capture institutional knowledge? No one advertises for that. Of course they don't.
I think we should be clear: Companies will still need software that furthers their corporate goals and even gives them competitive advantage. That would be purchased and developed, if necessary, in house, or on a proprietary basis. But it needs to run on the company's computer system eventually, and its perfectly possible that system/network can be "rented out" from a utility.
History is littered with great firms that got killed by disruption. Of course, the personal computer, a technology that first took root as a toy, got Digital Equipment Corporation. Kodak missed the boat for a long time on digital imaging. Sony was slow to get MP3 technology. Microsoft doesn't know what to do with open source software. And so on.
I only use the computer for editing. I don't have an eight-track, otherwise I probably never would have bought a computer. When I first got my Mac, I was exploring its possibilities and had fun with all of the sound hacking software, but I'm not interested in that approach. I toyed with the idea of releasing a 12-inch of all the stuff I did early on but good sense prevented me from doing so.
There's been a lot companies that have shown "zero to one" kind of growth in the computer, internet software age. Facebook and Google are zero to one companies. Apple's iPhone was the first smartphone that really works, and of course, then you scale it horizontally, but the vertical component was really critical. Space X would also be one.
I think that freely available software can not only keep up with the evolution of commercial software, but often exceed what you can do commercially.
A technology becomes truly disruptive when it drives the marginal cost of something that used to be scarce and expensive to approach zero. Thus, it used to be to deploy software at scale, you had to fund a data center, buy a set of servers, storage, and networking gear, build an in-house IT management capability, and buy an expensive stack of enabling software before you could even get started. Now you can get all that from Amazon or Microsoft on a pay-as-you-grow model.
Thus it is no longer a Caesar or a Napoleon who decides on the fate of any particular war but a piece of software! In short, the political intelligence of war and the political intelligence of society no longer penetrate the techno-scientific world.
Software is a gas ! It expands to fit the container it is in !
Being blind, I rely on software that talks to me.
The True-GNU philosophy is more extreme than I care for, but it certainly laid a foundation for the current scene, as well as providing real software.
Even though I teach with 35mm, my method takes people by surprise, because it isn't fast, and it isn't about hardware or software, or even great results. It's about great process.
That's software in the States that I helped to develop. It enables people with disabilities to improvise.
Obviously solving the education problem is big and complex, and there's already so many failings, but coding is the new fluency. This is the most valuable skill of this century. If you want to be a founder of a company, and not even just a tech company, but like a founder of a company, because I'm telling you software is going to play a role.
I am not versed in production software. I have basic knowledge, but it ends there.
Microsoft has laid down the foundations for next-generation computing and is the founder in terms of providing user-friendly software - thereby increasing the number of novice users.
Microsoft develops a lot of software that allows people to realize their potential.
I've passion for software, and Microsoft provide me a true platform.
I would definitely like to work at Microsoft, since software development and exploring new technologies has always been my passion, and Microsoft is best when it comes to next-generation software technologies.
When it comes to e-book playback devices and software, I have always thought that the emphasis on ergonomic concerns as a tipping point for the end-user population was misplaced.
Software was changing so fast, so unbelievable, that that got very quick adoption.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: