|
There must be venture capitalists and romantic people founding companies like Ubuntu, but the rest are like you describe for a very good reason. They are controlled by managers who easily migrate from one company to another and thus think only about the bottom line. Even worse, they think only about the tomorrow bottom line at best.
|
|
|
|
|
"trying to find a company to work for that was willing to take risks "
Now that seems to me like a bit of introspection is in order. The statement to me reads something like this "I am disappointed that there are no companies out there willing to go out on a limb whilst still offering me a risk free salary"
To me there seems to be something fundamentally wrong with that statement, I just can't place my finger on it ....
Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.
~ Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you're wrong. I work for one. But privacy issues prevent me from naming it publicly.
|
|
|
|
|
It is possible to dare, despite the fact that you work for invertebrates.
My product emphasizes usability, even though everyone else's response to a 'situation' is "just pop up a dialog". This is for a machine that is printing on paper at 17 feet per second.
I persist everything in human-readable XML files, even though everyone else thinks comma-separated values are "good enough".
I use C# and WPF. 'Nuff said.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree. My career ranged over 40+ years, and the only company where I worked that did anything creative was a mid sized one (approx 500 employees) that was still controlled by the original founder. Neither the lawyers, nor the accountants ran the company. He (the founder) had both lawyers and accountants to tell him HOW to do what he wanted, not tell him why he couldn't do it. He knew his industry inside and out, and had a knack for identifying what products would be needed in a couple of years, not what his competitors had today. In that company, not trying was the sin. Failing was OK, as long as there weren't too many failures.
I remember a story about the development of the Boeing 747 where Bill Boeing and Juan Tripp (CEO of Pan-Am) essentially bet their companies on the 747 airplane, and that plane turned out to be one of the most successful planes. Much later, after Boeing had passed away, some executive at Boeing said with some pride, that that could never happen today (too many checks and balances in place).
Most likely the only places where you can find the leading edge product development you're seeking is in very small start-ups, where the founders are actively engaged and everyone shares "the vision".
My two cents worth.
volee1968
|
|
|
|
|
Companies taking such risks are not hiring people who get paid...
These ideas start with people who are not working to feed their families.
I disagree, I see it all of the time.
I was just helping someone (for free) do some web work to help their company take money from dwolla.
The setup... He does not have to work, but he is starting a company "in his garage", that some day may make a lot of people good money (and him rich, again)...
Keep in mind. It was Edison, who promised Tesla a big bonus if he increased the efficiency of his motors, and then told him ~"No. I was joking. I am not paying you." So, keep in mind, you might get what you are looking for. I have been there, too.
So, the ones doing what you describe, are not marketing, and usually don't have a big budget to hire people with great skills. They need some level of VC money to start hiring.
Otherwise, go check out some of the incubators that might be in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
As an academic (in areas of science) I have a very similar experience about research in universities - the people who hold the reins (grant providers) want guaranteed results, so everyone does the easier stuff. Still, things can progress slowly, step by step, in this manner. However, like you I find such approaches largely uninspiring and I wonder whether progress overall is being slowed, since historically leaps and bounds were very important. Money never drives innovation, though it is a necessary ingredient it often holds innovation back.
|
|
|
|
|
J Julian wrote: trying to find a company to work for that was willing to take risks and shoot for the moon... there is no companies like this anymore
They exist. They're called startups.
Once people start depending on the company for a paycheck, that kind of risky behavior must stop.
You're looking for a company trying to invent a new technology.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your points are well taken. There's the other side to it too - when we say "companies", we shouldn't forget that that means "people". Every company starts with some individual person, or a partnership of persons. Some no doubt are interested in just a bottom line - and that's not such a bad thing itself - but many begin businesses because they have a passion to move an interest forward and see it take on its own life, and are willing to take personal & financial risks to do so.
When things fail in a business, those taking the risks must deal with the consequences. Sure, an employee of a company that fails may lose a job, and that's not something to dismiss. But that employee certainly can pursue another job with a different organization. The business owner though - that individual may very well have risked his or her life savings, a house, future retirement security, reasonable health care to establish the capital to create the company. Failure in the company means something entirely different for that individual that took the risk. This shouldn't be dismissed either. If a company is nervous about taking risks and shooting for the moon, understand it comes down to another person, such as yourself, who has to deal at a very different level with the consequences of potential failure.
I started a small business a couple of years ago. The experience so far has been fascinating to me, particularly in expanding my own perspective about what it means to accept financial risk in the pursuit of a passion.
|
|
|
|
|
J Julian wrote: And I realized that the reason there is no companies like this anymore, is that they only worry about the bottom line. They no longer care to challenge or make a real difference. Only make more money.
Boy, you nailed that one on the head.
Companies like you describe do exist ... well, at least I know of one: Me. I have always just developed stuff because I thought it would be useful and I enjoy coding. Have several things developed but it just hasn't become about money yet. What's funny is that I've become SME (after many years of working with it) to a product that will eventually be phased out but, in the meantime is paying me pretty well. You might say I hit the "mother lode" with that one but as for products I've developed myself, maybe one will catch fire someday, or not. Still like making them, though.  If you want to see one of them: http://www.simplesoftwarebydesign.com
|
|
|
|
|
I feel sure there are more companies like you are searching for than ever before. The thing is, companies like that are invariably young, small companies - companies that are just starting out with the dreams and aspirations that you seek. They don't all succeed at all, but those that do often eventually turn into those companies that you dislike, that only want to make more money.
The answer is to go and be that company that you seek. Do it yourself, you clearly have the desire.
Bill P.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I'm with you on this. In the software industry there's nothing "new" for decades now. Always same-old-same-old dressed up in new clothes (at best). There's another issue here ... most of what we do now was "invented" prior to the 70s, new things are hard to even think about.
I'd give my left armpit to be the next John McCarthy! (Note not anything mundane like Gates/jobs) But I realise it's extremely difficult to think of a new WAY to instruct a computer to do what you want, much more difficult than inventing your own brand of syntax/semantics to do exactly the same thing as Fortran did ... only "different".
Partly the reason I like the job I have now ... Construction Architecture ... at least here the chance of doing some new design no-one's ever done before is greater than 0 (if you can find the right client).
|
|
|
|
|
Battery powered pipe[^]
Features:
.New brand and high quality
.Tastes like real cigarette
.No tobacco, no burning, no tar and no real smoke
.No cancerous substances, no ashtrays, no cigarette butts and no horrible smells
.Powered by 1*CR18350 battery
.Health, security, no second-hand smoking
.Classical Pipe design, it will never out of today's fashion
.Aesthetic
Wanna look cool get one of these babies and the chicks will come a runnin? 
|
|
|
|
|
If that's elegant I'm Lord Foofoo of Brackanar! THESE[^] are elegant, I'd almost start smoking again for one.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
aha Lord Foofoo we meet at last, prepair to meet thy maker
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
I remember back when smoking was cool, a long long time ago college types would take up the pipe just to impress women.
This instrument would not attract the ugliest woman on campus.
My brother was a pipe smoker for many years and had quite a collection and when he passed I got one of his more elegant pipes. I've almost got it out a few times but I know if I do then I'll be back at it regular.
|
|
|
|
|
I did smoke one for years, well smoke is probably an exaggeration, it was more prodding and lighting than actually smoking, however it was wonderful for making your point in the pub, nothing quite like it for emphasizing a point, adds so much stature even when your p1ssed and wrong
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: ...a long long time ago college types would take up the pipe just to impress women...
Yeah, I remember those days. The pipe owners were all in the computer science department, had long hair, wore sandals and their main computers of interest ran unix.
Takes me back. Sniff.
Never moon a werewolf.
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
Ah those were the daze.
|
|
|
|
|
Looking at that site, it won't be long until electronic cigarettes are cheaper than real ones
Thank god I don't smoke, I couldn't afford it.
|
|
|
|
|
It's an expensive, filthy habit that is very hard to break. I wish I would have never started but had sense enough about 4 years ago to quit.
|
|
|
|
|
what next a EBong?
and I dont mean this lady
ebong[^]
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote: what next a EBong?
*** Cough cough ***[^]
The missus says that the ever safety-concious Arabs actually have compact versions of these intended for use when driving. Apparently having hot coals at the top of an unstable bottle/pipe combination isn't conducive to fast cornering.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
