Given the technology that's already available, we should have cars that drive us around, in absolute safety, while we lounge in the back and sip champagne. All we need is a video camera on the roof, plugged into a PC, right? We have all the necessary hardware, and have had it for years, but don't yet have robot-driven cars because we don't have the software. This book explains how we can build better software and all get our own high-tech chauffeur.
After the Software Wars
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
| |||||||||||||||
Browse our Bookshelf Favorites store for big savings on popular fiction, nonfiction, children's books, and more. |
Book Description
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
21 of 23 people found the following review helpful
By Lorenz Gude
Format:Paperback
The existence of free software is an anomaly. It does not fit our assumptions about what must be private property and what should be free to all. Keith Curtis's After the Software Wars is hard to put down because it makes a passionate case that software should be treated like the free exchange of ideas in the world of science. The book manages to consistently upset our industrial age assumptions about proprietary software. Many, including myself, would point out that the demise of proprietary software is not a done deal and would argue that software is a combination of freely exchanged science and proprietary applied science. But Curtis's argument is based in experience (11 years programming at Microsoft) and like a good lawyer arguing one side of a case he forces us to consider the merits of his position.To interested computer users like myself who are not programmers, he convincingly peels back the layers of the software development process so that we can see the strengths of free software (and the weaknesses of proprietary software) very clearly indeed.
During his time at Microsoft Curtis saw Windows struggle with the expensive limitations of the closed industrial model while its free rival - Linux - consistently improved relative to Windows to the point where he is now quite happy to use only Linux. (I have used it as my main operating system for over a year and agree it compares favorable to Windows in most ways). The book is also timely because it asks us to take seriously a clearly less expensive and arguably better approach to software development at a time when economic stress makes it particularly relevant to do so.
While the Linux phenomena tells us that the assumptions of the industrial age don't work for software, it doesn't necessarily tell us where the open model is most important or essential to progress. Linux may or may not go on to 'world domination' as Curtis puts it - Microsoft is making a serious comeback just now with Windows 7 and remains dominant with over 90% of the world's desktops despite shooting itself in the foot with Vista. Still, After the Software Wars makes it much easier to appreciate the enormous difficulties Microsoft faces trying to maintain a secure and smoothly functioning operating system using the proprietary model.
In the second half of After the Software Wars Curtis turns his attention to programming languages, and demonstrates where the proprietary model may well be holding us back in a more fundamental and critical way. He makes the case that the dominant C and C++ programming languages are obsolete and worse - disastrously inefficient. Neither are proprietary which may partly explain why they continue to dominate software development despite their origins in the technology of the 70s. For example, Curtis explains how they suffer from serious limitations such as failure to clean up memory after use (programmers call it garbage collection) which in turn is a major source of bugs requiring endless further work. However, in terms of the free versus propriety dilemma I think his most telling example is his account of how Sun and Microsoft fought to control Java and ruined its chances of becoming a more efficient replacement for the older languages. The implication is clear - developing an up to date, open source, programming language may be more urgent and necessary than even the adoption of Linux.
Speaking for myself as an observer of the interaction of society and technology in the McLuhan tradition I see the simple existence of free software as requiring a change in how we divide what is held in common from what is proprietary. Just as movable type contained a core idea of the industrial revolution - interchangeable parts - I think that free software will eventually compel a new understanding of what divides common from private property.
During his time at Microsoft Curtis saw Windows struggle with the expensive limitations of the closed industrial model while its free rival - Linux - consistently improved relative to Windows to the point where he is now quite happy to use only Linux. (I have used it as my main operating system for over a year and agree it compares favorable to Windows in most ways). The book is also timely because it asks us to take seriously a clearly less expensive and arguably better approach to software development at a time when economic stress makes it particularly relevant to do so.
While the Linux phenomena tells us that the assumptions of the industrial age don't work for software, it doesn't necessarily tell us where the open model is most important or essential to progress. Linux may or may not go on to 'world domination' as Curtis puts it - Microsoft is making a serious comeback just now with Windows 7 and remains dominant with over 90% of the world's desktops despite shooting itself in the foot with Vista. Still, After the Software Wars makes it much easier to appreciate the enormous difficulties Microsoft faces trying to maintain a secure and smoothly functioning operating system using the proprietary model.
In the second half of After the Software Wars Curtis turns his attention to programming languages, and demonstrates where the proprietary model may well be holding us back in a more fundamental and critical way. He makes the case that the dominant C and C++ programming languages are obsolete and worse - disastrously inefficient. Neither are proprietary which may partly explain why they continue to dominate software development despite their origins in the technology of the 70s. For example, Curtis explains how they suffer from serious limitations such as failure to clean up memory after use (programmers call it garbage collection) which in turn is a major source of bugs requiring endless further work. However, in terms of the free versus propriety dilemma I think his most telling example is his account of how Sun and Microsoft fought to control Java and ruined its chances of becoming a more efficient replacement for the older languages. The implication is clear - developing an up to date, open source, programming language may be more urgent and necessary than even the adoption of Linux.
Speaking for myself as an observer of the interaction of society and technology in the McLuhan tradition I see the simple existence of free software as requiring a change in how we divide what is held in common from what is proprietary. Just as movable type contained a core idea of the industrial revolution - interchangeable parts - I think that free software will eventually compel a new understanding of what divides common from private property.
8 of 9 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
I've been a huge fan of open-source for a very long time. I found Curtis' had a great number of very good insights but lacked a unifying structure or discipline. As a result, a lot of what he writes is far less insightful, or interesting.
The book reads like a collection of loosely related blog posts. Perhaps that would have been the better style for this kind of book. Curtis is obviously very smart and well informed. Like other intelligent blogger-style-writers such as Joel Spolsky, Curtis hits on a number of interesting topics.
As another review mentioned, Curtis' book is billed as a Microsoft veteran's perspective on open-source. Curtis does write from this perspective in some chapters. Those chapters are perhaps the most interesting of the entire book. It is this ability to consider political implications and technical that constitute the book's highlights.
However, as the book progresses, Curtis turns his focus away from natural economic and technical advantages of open-source and starts to slip into a ideologically-driven critique/screed against technical decisions or policy of for-profit companies and what he perceives as their missteps.
I definitely believe that Curtis' views that he offers in the first half of the book are worth a read. His descriptions of a few issues are great:
* Linux in general. Both from a conceptual standpoint, and a highlevel technical standpoint, Curtis shines a light on Linux. He improved the context and facts with which I understand Linux, and its economic advantages.
* Wikipedia and the power of open models, and shared knowledge which Wikipedia has brought to the fore and which has proven remarkably more powerful than alternatives.
* How opensource fits into technological progress, the concept of the singularity, and where it fits into society's future and economy.
* How copyleft, copyright, and patent law fit into the big picture.
These were all very interesting topics. And, I walked away agreeing that open source will necessarily be a key component of our future progress. The availability of free, well-developed tools means that starting with an open-source base provides a tremendous advantage that pure closed-source can't compete against. We are like dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants.
Curtis' makes a strong case that software, algorithms, and source-code is just like science. When we have giants to stand on, we progress better. In the same way, when science is open, we make better progress than the alchemy that was done in secret.
Unfortunately, Curtis slips when he start delving into the nitty-gritty of the current landscape of players and technical details. This constitutes most of the second half of the book. In general, he gets in trouble when he starts dealing with all the particulars and details of specific implementations, company policies and other minutiae. The book is at its absolute best when he is describing high level design concepts and using specifics as examples of larger themes and concepts. ie Using Wikipedia to demonstrate the staggering power of shared open knowledge is a great use of specifics. Diving into the philosophical pros and cons of each of the popular Linux and proprietary desktop operating systems in which the only standard or purpose is how they're meeting Curtis' vision for what should or must be, is not a good use of specifics.
The book reads like a collection of loosely related blog posts. Perhaps that would have been the better style for this kind of book. Curtis is obviously very smart and well informed. Like other intelligent blogger-style-writers such as Joel Spolsky, Curtis hits on a number of interesting topics.
As another review mentioned, Curtis' book is billed as a Microsoft veteran's perspective on open-source. Curtis does write from this perspective in some chapters. Those chapters are perhaps the most interesting of the entire book. It is this ability to consider political implications and technical that constitute the book's highlights.
However, as the book progresses, Curtis turns his focus away from natural economic and technical advantages of open-source and starts to slip into a ideologically-driven critique/screed against technical decisions or policy of for-profit companies and what he perceives as their missteps.
I definitely believe that Curtis' views that he offers in the first half of the book are worth a read. His descriptions of a few issues are great:
* Linux in general. Both from a conceptual standpoint, and a highlevel technical standpoint, Curtis shines a light on Linux. He improved the context and facts with which I understand Linux, and its economic advantages.
* Wikipedia and the power of open models, and shared knowledge which Wikipedia has brought to the fore and which has proven remarkably more powerful than alternatives.
* How opensource fits into technological progress, the concept of the singularity, and where it fits into society's future and economy.
* How copyleft, copyright, and patent law fit into the big picture.
These were all very interesting topics. And, I walked away agreeing that open source will necessarily be a key component of our future progress. The availability of free, well-developed tools means that starting with an open-source base provides a tremendous advantage that pure closed-source can't compete against. We are like dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants.
Curtis' makes a strong case that software, algorithms, and source-code is just like science. When we have giants to stand on, we progress better. In the same way, when science is open, we make better progress than the alchemy that was done in secret.
Unfortunately, Curtis slips when he start delving into the nitty-gritty of the current landscape of players and technical details. This constitutes most of the second half of the book. In general, he gets in trouble when he starts dealing with all the particulars and details of specific implementations, company policies and other minutiae. The book is at its absolute best when he is describing high level design concepts and using specifics as examples of larger themes and concepts. ie Using Wikipedia to demonstrate the staggering power of shared open knowledge is a great use of specifics. Diving into the philosophical pros and cons of each of the popular Linux and proprietary desktop operating systems in which the only standard or purpose is how they're meeting Curtis' vision for what should or must be, is not a good use of specifics.
8 of 11 people found the following review helpful
By Tom Reid
Format:Paperback
I'm a huge exponent of Open Source and an IT industry (Sun Microsystems in particular) veteran, so this book was of interest to me. I agree with the other reviewers who stated that Curtis is good on expanding on the top level principles of open source and why community developed software will always be better software, but the book lacks structure, tends to go off on tangents, contains some very sloppy writing and "opinion" dressed up as fact.
Frankly I'm pretty annoyed that I paid money for this book, as at times, it does seem like a collection of barely thought out blog posts thrown together with minimal thought. It's ironic that Curtis is such a fan of Wikipedia, as many of his claims would, I'm sure, be edited out of Wikipedia, if he tried to write them there.
A particularly ludicrous example can be found on page 231, at the beginning of the "Open Document Format" chapter. The first paragraph manages to contain two "I have heard that...." statements.
Particularly ludicrous is the statement that.."I have heard that every corporate purchase in the UK involves the creation of an Excel spreadsheet at a stage of the process". When I was at college, any lecturer marking a paper I had written, would have immediately struck out any insertion by me of a "I have heard that statement", so why Curtis believes he can charge money for a book that contains unreferenced claims like this that are impossible to verify, is beyond me. I lived in the UK for the first 38 years of my life and can state this claim is just plain stupid and it seems like Curtis prints statements in a book from stuff he just believes to be true. And when I think about it, as Sun ran it's business globally (including the UK) on Star Office, (which is just Open Office branded "Sun") and has no Excel in it, that fact alone demolishes this unfounded claim. Why print something so unfounded?
Also on the subject of Sun, I find the statement on page on page 268 that Sun is "just as propitiatory as Microsoft" to be misleading and prejudiced. Curtis may not like Sun for making mistakes over JAVA and suing his former employers, but by calling the company who created open office by open sourcing the original Star Office and creating an open source version of it's "crown jewels", the operating system "Solaris" "just as propitiatory as Microsoft", Curtis is showing he is motivated more to air his badly thought out personal opinions, than he is to create a really compelling and academically watertight case for open source. Sun is absolutely nowhere near as propitiatory as Microsoft and by stating this, Curtis just devalues his own arguments. I can hear any number of badly thought out personal opinions in our local bar, I don't need to pay money to Amazon to read them.
Further, there is just some bad, sloppy writing in this. Page 267 is a classic: "Microsoft got it's tush handed to it at the DOJ trial...". I may not be American, so I'm maybe missing something, but what on earth does that mean? The standards of English acceptable in a blog posting or a geeky forum are not the same as the standards of writing you use in a book that is trying to prove a point about something really important like open source.
One of the joys of IT and software is that it is a truly global phenomenon and national barriers mean nothing, but come on Mr. Curtis, you are actually creating barriers to understanding and international acceptance of your arguments by using juvenile slang Americanisms in your book. How much software is created in Bangalore and how many people there are familiar with having to having their "tush handed to them"?
There are other simple grammatical errors and typos left in the published book, and whilst it seems a little petty to itemize or repeat them, my point is that you expect that someone has used spell checker or re-read their own work before they consider publishing it and charging people money for it on Amazon.
The structure of the book is also sloppy and self indulgent. Curtis seems to justify the insertion of a rather silly, speculative ramble on space exploration at the end of the book on the simple statement that he thinks Bill Gates should spend some of his billions on space exploration.
The entire chapter structure of this book seems in no particular order, maybe Curtis just sequenced the chapters in in the order he wrote it in?
So to summarize what I thought, I kind of feel the same about this book as I did after watching Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911. In both cases, I think the creator of the work (a film obviously in Michael Moore's case) is absolutely on the right side of the argument, but they have argued their case in such an amateur, sloppy and self indulgent way, that it almost threatens to undermine the whole argument.
This book will only ever "preach to the converted" like me, it does not have a fraction of the intellectual rigor to stand up as a compelling argument in it's own right and will give anyone who is anti open source plenty of ammunition to argue against it.
I think a lot of the buzz around this book, is the interest caused by an ex Microsoft guy becoming an open source advocate, but I think that's the only really interesting thing about it. Being an ex Microsoft open source advocate does not make Keith Curtis any sort of writer and he is absolutely not a writer, especially one who can reasonably justifiably charging for his work. It's just too amateur and sloppy.
I did notice after spending money on this, that it's also available as a free digital download and that's about the right price to charge for this. Of course there are a billion other pieces of writing on open source on the internet out there, just google "open source", you don't need to buy the book. I'm sure there is better material on the subject out there for free.
I think the open source movement needs a good book out there to spread the word outside of the IT community, as I think free software is a very important economic and societal force. So I'm glad this book at least exists, but a much better book on this very important subject is still waiting to be written. Keith Curtis should stick to blogging.
Frankly I'm pretty annoyed that I paid money for this book, as at times, it does seem like a collection of barely thought out blog posts thrown together with minimal thought. It's ironic that Curtis is such a fan of Wikipedia, as many of his claims would, I'm sure, be edited out of Wikipedia, if he tried to write them there.
A particularly ludicrous example can be found on page 231, at the beginning of the "Open Document Format" chapter. The first paragraph manages to contain two "I have heard that...." statements.
Particularly ludicrous is the statement that.."I have heard that every corporate purchase in the UK involves the creation of an Excel spreadsheet at a stage of the process". When I was at college, any lecturer marking a paper I had written, would have immediately struck out any insertion by me of a "I have heard that statement", so why Curtis believes he can charge money for a book that contains unreferenced claims like this that are impossible to verify, is beyond me. I lived in the UK for the first 38 years of my life and can state this claim is just plain stupid and it seems like Curtis prints statements in a book from stuff he just believes to be true. And when I think about it, as Sun ran it's business globally (including the UK) on Star Office, (which is just Open Office branded "Sun") and has no Excel in it, that fact alone demolishes this unfounded claim. Why print something so unfounded?
Also on the subject of Sun, I find the statement on page on page 268 that Sun is "just as propitiatory as Microsoft" to be misleading and prejudiced. Curtis may not like Sun for making mistakes over JAVA and suing his former employers, but by calling the company who created open office by open sourcing the original Star Office and creating an open source version of it's "crown jewels", the operating system "Solaris" "just as propitiatory as Microsoft", Curtis is showing he is motivated more to air his badly thought out personal opinions, than he is to create a really compelling and academically watertight case for open source. Sun is absolutely nowhere near as propitiatory as Microsoft and by stating this, Curtis just devalues his own arguments. I can hear any number of badly thought out personal opinions in our local bar, I don't need to pay money to Amazon to read them.
Further, there is just some bad, sloppy writing in this. Page 267 is a classic: "Microsoft got it's tush handed to it at the DOJ trial...". I may not be American, so I'm maybe missing something, but what on earth does that mean? The standards of English acceptable in a blog posting or a geeky forum are not the same as the standards of writing you use in a book that is trying to prove a point about something really important like open source.
One of the joys of IT and software is that it is a truly global phenomenon and national barriers mean nothing, but come on Mr. Curtis, you are actually creating barriers to understanding and international acceptance of your arguments by using juvenile slang Americanisms in your book. How much software is created in Bangalore and how many people there are familiar with having to having their "tush handed to them"?
There are other simple grammatical errors and typos left in the published book, and whilst it seems a little petty to itemize or repeat them, my point is that you expect that someone has used spell checker or re-read their own work before they consider publishing it and charging people money for it on Amazon.
The structure of the book is also sloppy and self indulgent. Curtis seems to justify the insertion of a rather silly, speculative ramble on space exploration at the end of the book on the simple statement that he thinks Bill Gates should spend some of his billions on space exploration.
The entire chapter structure of this book seems in no particular order, maybe Curtis just sequenced the chapters in in the order he wrote it in?
So to summarize what I thought, I kind of feel the same about this book as I did after watching Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911. In both cases, I think the creator of the work (a film obviously in Michael Moore's case) is absolutely on the right side of the argument, but they have argued their case in such an amateur, sloppy and self indulgent way, that it almost threatens to undermine the whole argument.
This book will only ever "preach to the converted" like me, it does not have a fraction of the intellectual rigor to stand up as a compelling argument in it's own right and will give anyone who is anti open source plenty of ammunition to argue against it.
I think a lot of the buzz around this book, is the interest caused by an ex Microsoft guy becoming an open source advocate, but I think that's the only really interesting thing about it. Being an ex Microsoft open source advocate does not make Keith Curtis any sort of writer and he is absolutely not a writer, especially one who can reasonably justifiably charging for his work. It's just too amateur and sloppy.
I did notice after spending money on this, that it's also available as a free digital download and that's about the right price to charge for this. Of course there are a billion other pieces of writing on open source on the internet out there, just google "open source", you don't need to buy the book. I'm sure there is better material on the subject out there for free.
I think the open source movement needs a good book out there to spread the word outside of the IT community, as I think free software is a very important economic and societal force. So I'm glad this book at least exists, but a much better book on this very important subject is still waiting to be written. Keith Curtis should stick to blogging.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
3.0 out of 5 stars
A good introduction for those not involved in Software
I liked the book but thought it would have more insights and less explanations about what the software is... Read more
Published 4 months ago by Hugo Blanco Sandoval
1.0 out of 5 stars
Heavily biased with lots of misinterpretations
The author is heavily biased and interprets his sources in very strange ways in order to prove his point. Read more
Published 13 months ago by Mikael Johansson
4.0 out of 5 stars
Intellectual promotion of FOSS
This book is interesting for the most part but at the end, it's not really so much about free software any more than it is about economic theory and politics. Read more
Published 22 months ago by EliasAlucard
1.0 out of 5 stars
A rant that goes on and on and changes topics in middiscussion
I didn't even finish the book, thought I tried. This should never have been published as a book as its total rubbish. It's a rant and changes topics in mid-chapters sometimes. Read more
Published on April 1, 2011 by Emil
4.0 out of 5 stars
Interesting reading...
As someone who was formerly employed in the software industry, I found this book a fascinating read. Read more
Published on December 11, 2010 by Kerry Nietz
1.0 out of 5 stars
mediocre at best
As others have said, the book is not particularly well-written and lacks structure. But in the appendix (of the PDF at least) he goes on an incoherent right-wing rant that would... Read more
Published on November 17, 2010 by rwm
5.0 out of 5 stars
Very Intersting and Inspiring Read - Looking forward to next...
This book was very interesting and I enjoyed reading it a lot. The author does a great job in making his points about getting the most from computer technology. Read more
Published on August 18, 2009 by Shannon VanWagner
1.0 out of 5 stars
Little actual insight
When I purchased this book I expected insight into the free software world from a former senior Microsoft employee. Thats certainly how this book was presented. Read more
Published on July 27, 2009 by Timothy M. Gilbert
4.0 out of 5 stars
Insightful
Very interesting to read. Along with another reviewer, I'm not sure about the applicability of the last couple chapters but the rest of the book is great. Read more
Published on July 7, 2009 by D. Slager
