Developer Hegemony: The Future O
Additionally, it is common to see long term projections based on velocity and estimates, which in turn creates an unending pressure to keep velocity high and a focus solely on new feature work. If developers are judged by velocity, output, and estimates, they will avoid any activities that could put these at risk. It just so happens that they avoid the very same activities that are common to high-performing teams:
Developer Hegemony: The Future O
I think you get the point implicitly. But let me say it explicitly. Youcould have the absolute perfect, killer technical product sent fromthe future and indistinguishable from magic, and, without the othercomponents of a business, you will not make any money.
The fix, as iterated over above, is to find ways to partner with the developer opportunists.Recognize they are experts at efficiency; are independent thinkers and problem solvers, and canwork/live however they want to get the job done. Focus on the outcome, not how they live, hoursworked, or where they work.
So, working backward, you have two paths to meaningful influence in the software development industry. You can enter software as a software developer and then look for opportunities to stop writing code and start supervising. Or you can enter never intending to write code, just looking to supervise. (This also applies to the path of entering as a line-level project manager, which is more or less a sort of internship for line management.)
It's been said that software is eating the planet. The modern economy the world itself relies on technology. Demand for the people who can produce it far outweighs the supply. So why do developers occupy largely subordinate roles in the corporate structure?
Developer Hegemony explores the past, present, and future of the corporation and what it means for developers. While it outlines problems with the modern corporate structure, it's ultimately a play-by-play of how to leave the corporate carnival and control your own destiny. And it's an emboldening, specific vision of what software development looks like in the world of developer hegemony -- one where developers band together into partner firms of efficiencers, finally able to command the pay, respect, and freedom that's earned by solving problems no one else can.
Developers, if you grow tired of being treated like geeks who can only be trusted to take orders and churn out code, consider this your call to arms. Bring about the autonomous future that s rightfully yours. It's time for developer hegemony.
Peter Mangione, PhD, is codirector of the Center for Child and Family Studies, WestEd, in Sausalito, California. Peter is one of the principal developers of the Program for Infant/Toddler Care, a comprehensive approach to professional development of infant and toddler care teachers. [email protected]
'Is it possible that Latin America is now showing Europe where it is heading?', asks Ronaldo Munck provocatively on the first page of this book. Just as Marx said that industrial England showed the rest of the world where it was heading, the author writes that 'today the very complex, dynamic, conflictual but above all, original processes of development, new constructions of hegemony, and vision of social transformation in Latin America offer a fascinating laboratory for the rest of the world and, maybe, a mirror to the future' (p. 1). This, then, is the book that was waiting to be written since the emergence of the 'new left' over a decade ago, reinterpreting 500 years of the region's history in the light of this new phase.
Microsoft's announcement that the Xbox One will provide some channel for supporting indie developers and self-publishing is an important step for the platform, and confirms a major change in the status quo of the console market. All three platform holders will now, through a number of schemes and in a variety of ways, allow small studios and indie developers to create and sell games on their consoles without going through a major publisher. The details of Microsoft's programme haven't been revealed, while Nintendo's indie support is a promising but poorly heralded work in progress, but the overall picture is clear: self-publishing is set to be a cornerstone of the next generation console business.
However, only a few weeks ago Microsoft seemed intent on ignoring the indie sector and refusing point-blank to open up its business to the extent required for self-publishing to work. To those insisting that this move has been part of the Xbox One roadmap all along, I must ask - who, exactly, drew up a roadmap whose early stages called for pointless dishonesty, alienating key partners and annoying the core audience, before taking a sharp turn for the better? If indie support really has been on the roadmap all along, then perhaps whoever is dreaming up Microsoft's communication strategy based on that roadmap ought to be excluded from any future cartographical endeavours, because their map-reading skills suck and the driver is looking very bloody confused.
This progression isn't going to stop. In fact, its effects are going to become increasingly pronounced. Even as tools like Unity and the simple power of online collaboration bring the creation of ever more impressive games within the reach of indie developers, the evolution of distribution channels and increasingly nuanced ways of engaging an audience and making a living from their support are ensuring that this revolution will be no flash in the pan. On the contrary - without ever actually supplanting the likes of FIFA, Madden and Call of Duty, all of which will remain perfectly secure as multi-billion dollar cultural touchstones, the self-published indie sector will quite inevitably grow in scale, reach and revenue. Even as we bemoan the slow, gasping death of the "A" and "AA" sectors - games which never matched AAA in quality or audience but still matched its price tags - the successor to those sectors is growing, expanding and maturing.
For Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, faced with what some believe to be an existential threat to the entire notion of a games console, embracing this future isn't a matter of being nice to indies or giving props to creativity - it's a matter of survival. I simply don't believe that any console platform can survive and thrive on blockbuster AAA titles alone. The most successful console platforms in history, such as the PlayStation 2 and the Nintendo DS, have been notable for the sheer breadth and depth of their software libraries. Each had their truly outstanding best-sellers, but the extraordinary success of each console was founded in its ability to offer a vast range of A and AA level games that appealed to a whole host of different niche audiences. Anyone familiar with the App Store will recognise the pattern. Beyond the best-sellers, Apple's remarkable iOS ecosystem has built its appeal on the huge range of games and applications that bring together a wealth of niche audiences into a single, gigantic customer base. In fact, Microsoft of all companies should know the value of this. The Windows hegemony was built not on the success of blockbusters like Microsoft Office, but on the vast number of small applications, essential to various kinds of business or hobby, which often don't run on anything other than Windows. Perhaps it's no coincidence that Microsoft's Road to Damascus conversion to indie support occurred so soon after a former Windows boss took over the Xbox division?
There are many different scenarios for the future of the games industry, and nobody whose opinion is worth listening to can honestly pick just one and say with certainty that it will come to pass. It's hard to say whether consoles will continue to exist beyond the current generation - I vote yes, personally, but with the full understanding that it may be as much an emotional as a rational vote - although anyone keen to dismiss the emotional component of consumer decision making in the games business doesn't understand the games business very well. It's tough to say what shape exactly the dominant business models (plural, for the existence of several is one thing of which I am quite sure) will take. There are wild-cards in the pack, like the intriguing idea that indie developers could start to work co-operatively and end up, accidentally or on purpose, creating a United Artists of sorts. The role of publishers is very much up in the air.
Yet there are certainties - absolutes that simply won't change, no matter how wildly you choose to speculate on the future. The cost of creating increasingly impressive games will keep falling, and the knowledge of how to do so will continue to spread - so more people will be making games. The audience will grow, because more creators means a more diverse spread of content, which means addressing wider demographics. And much of this - the new creators, making and distributing their cheap yet impressive games to audiences who exist in niches we have yet to explore - will take place not in the confines of the existing business model, but outside, in the world of self-publishing and direct audience engagement. That's certain. Indie development isn't a fragile flower that needs to be nurtured by platform holders; it's a train that's gathering pace. Their choice is to be on board, or to attempt to stand in its way.
The proposed NexTrade Exchange is an example of the future of the financial markets in that it will make use of innovative technology and new regulatory structures as part of a for-profit exchange. The proposed NexTrade Exchange plans to make available for the benefit of its members and their customers an electronic trading system (the "NexTrade Exchange System") to effect the purchase or sale of securities listed or admitted to trading on the proposed exchange and on other exchanges and markets. The proposed exchange, however, will not maintain a physical-trading floor. Members will access the NexTrade Exchange System from their own computer terminals and communicate with the system over commercial information services and networks. 350c69d7ab