Managing Computers in Large Organizations

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Managing Microcomputers in Large Organizations http://www.nap.edu/catalog/167.html About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution. TRENDS IN PERSONAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE 31 Major hardware shifts upset everyone, and long-term prediction is quite difficult at this point. I can't say what we will be doing three years from now because I honestly don't know. I can only talk about what I think will happen in the next year. A third characteristic that affects software forecasting is that nobody really understands what to do with a personal computer. We have this wonderful piece of technology for which creative people invent uses. The general public buys the tool because it does something for them on a day-to-day basis. But for our target market of managers and professionals I don't think the applications of personal computer technology will occupy more than 5 to 10 percent of their time. In the area of artificial intelligence, for example, I have given speeches about terrific products that could make managers and professionals more productive. But I don't know what shape such products might actually take or what their impact on end users or organizations might be because the creative spark for matching up the technology to market need is simply not there. You can't just hire a consultant to tell you, “Build this product.” I have never seen a successful microcomputer product developed that way and I am quite pessimistic about such efforts. So we are back to our small teams of heroic geniuses sitting in the corner. Even if they have a pipeline to a national corporate-user group, such as we have at Lotus, they simply cannot ask, “What do you want?” The technology is evolving so rapidly, both in hardware and software, that no one can fully articulate what is needed. An organization can only say, “Well, we think we need this, this, and this.” But could any organization have said several years ago that what it specifically needed was Visicalc? Absolutely not. The idea for Visicalc came out of creator Dan Brickland's head, was realized as a product, and now has several million quite happy electronic spreadsheet users. Visicalc could not have been developed by going out and doing market research. I expect the industry's long-term future to be very exciting, with innovative and useful applications being created and personal computers continuing to have a major impact in organizations. But I am quite uncertain about the nature of that impact and the kinds of developments that may occur beyond the next 12 months. Therefore, if it were my job to figure out what to do with personal computer technology in an organization, I would adopt a fairly cautious longterm approach. In the near term, however, we Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Managing Microcomputers in Large Organizations http://www.nap.edu/catalog/167.html About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution. TRENDS IN PERSONAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE 32 can say a number of things about what is likely to happen with software. Recently some new buzzwords have emerged that offer some clues. One of them is “integrated software.” What this says to me is that the ground rules are shifting and that the market expects IBM PCs or XTs to have available on them some multifunction application. Further, this multifunction application should address itself to a generic set of needs of users in organizations. There are five such broad application areas: spreadsheet, database, word processing, graphics, and communications. These needs are not new, but there is a much sharper focus and emphasis on new products coming out in these areas. Previously we had individual products such as Visicalc and Visiplot; today we have integrated offerings from Lotus, Visicorp, Apple with its Lisa machine, Context with its MBA package, and about 15 other companies. It is apparent that, at least as a concept, integrated software is a big-win item. If you can deliver an integrated product that does several things well at an acceptable speed, that has a common command structure or user interface, and that has some ability to share data, you are removing a lot of the fragmentation that existed previously with individual products. If by learning one set of commands you can access database data in a spreadsheet, make graphs from a spreadsheet, and incorporate pieces of the database into your word processor, you have a much more versatile product. There seems to be general agreement that the five applications— spreadsheet, database, word processing, graphics, and communication—while not exhaustive, answer basic productivity needs. Beyond that, there is a diversity of approaches being taken toward integrated software. No one has yet delivered the perfect product, which, I think, would have to perform the five individual applications quite well. In other words, if you give people a spreadsheet application so they can do their forecasting or their planning it has to be at least as good as stand-alone spreadsheets. Similarly, a word processing application that will be used for everything from dashing off a quick memo to doing a complete report or document should not be a substantial compromise below a stand-alone word processor. The inevitability of some compromise is one of the many criticisms of integrated software packages, but I believe the geniuses will solve that particular problem, as they have others. They will Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Page 1 and 2: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/167.html
Page 3 and 4: Managing Microcomputers in Large Or
Page 39: Managing Microcomputers in Large Or
Page 91 and 92:
Managing Microcomputers in Large Or
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
show all

Managing Computers in Large Organizations

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?