And pick a proportional typeface while they're at it. I understand that there are good reasons for using monospaced typefaces for coding, but they're not designed for body copy.
Yeah I'm really interested in what this is saying but it's not easy to know what it's going to say by skimming or jumping to the bottom, which is a UX bug.
There is a huge profit motive to enable end users to use computers as general purpose machines. The problem is that the percentage of the population using computers has increased. Now the population of computer uses has a higher percentage of users not interested in developing software. These users want a simple interface with a low learning curve. They want to get on with the job that interests them.
The core of the article's argument is that databases accessible to non-programmers (like MS Access) died out because they conflicted with the profit motives of the companies making them. This doesn't make much sense, you'd think there would be more open source projects to accomplish the same thing. SQLite is the closest I can think of, but even that isn't super accessible to non-programmers. I think the real issue is that a spreadsheet works for most basic stuff, and the gap where a spreadsheet is not enough but it's not complicated enough to need a full RDBMS is incredibly small.
These tools also require more than many users are willing to give. Spread sheets are an easy start for most users. Databases are scary and hard to learn for many.
> you'd think there would be more open source projects to accomplish the same thing
I would think there would be & I've been supremely disappointed open-source spent years trying to win the desktop rather than overthrow the tyranny of the application.
I wouldn’t call MS access a DB that is accessible to non programmers, it’s a local DB with rather limited capabilities and performance.
You can create a front end for non programmers to use for any DB, in fact MS Access when it was still part of Office could be used to manage remote DBs such as MSSQL.
Now most of that functionality is embedded in Excel you can load and update tables fairly easily with external data sources.
MS Access had a bit more functionality similar to some of the Oracle enterprise applications stack for local app development but it simply died when excel became more feature rich and when companies needed more than MS Access could offer.
It basically came to the point where there was little real use for MS Access.
Sorry, but I think this is a poorly thought-out argument.
Main reasoning:
All in all, though, the desktop database industry has entirely collapsed since the early '00s. Desktop databases are typically viewed today as legacy artifacts, a sign of poor engineering and extensive technical debt. Far from democratizing, they are seen as constraining.
What changed?
I posit that the decline of desktop databases reflects a larger shift in the software industry: broadly speaking, an increase in profit motive, and a decrease in ambition.
...
The software industry, I contend, has fallen from grace. It is hard to place when this change occurred, because it happened slowly and by degrees, but it seems to me like sometime during the late '90s to early '00s the software industry fundamentally gave up. Interest in solving problems was abandoned and replaced by a drive to engage users, a vague term that is nearly always interpreted in a way that raises fundamental ethical concerns. Computing is no longer a lofty field engaged in the salvation of mankind; it is a field of mechanical labor engaged in the conversion of people into money.
In short, capitalism ruins computing once again.
A far more likely reason, and one which I believe is the true cause, is that there is relatively little demand for desktop databases:
* there is a non-trivial degree of tech knowledge needed to run and maintain them
* they are tied to the desktop, and not ubiquitously accessible
In short, people want to focus on the task (running their household; keep track of collections; running their small business; logging inventory; etc) and not the technical means of accomplishing that task
This is all about a collapse in demand, and a shift to an alternative that better suits the needs and desires of the end-users.
It has nothing to do with "capitalism" ruining things. (Side note - the author has not defined capitalism, and I don't think it actually means what he/she thinks it does.)
Edited to add: there are still many desktop database programs offered to users. If there were still a huge demand for them, they would outcompete the supposedly evil industry products that so upset the author.
11 comments
[ 5.0 ms ] story [ 41.8 ms ] threadDBs accessible to non-programmers (think MS Access) allegedly died out because they conflicted with the companies' profit motives.
So, I guess the author has never heard of sqlite? Power users today can easily and freely create offline-first apps.
I would think there would be & I've been supremely disappointed open-source spent years trying to win the desktop rather than overthrow the tyranny of the application.
You can create a front end for non programmers to use for any DB, in fact MS Access when it was still part of Office could be used to manage remote DBs such as MSSQL.
Now most of that functionality is embedded in Excel you can load and update tables fairly easily with external data sources.
MS Access had a bit more functionality similar to some of the Oracle enterprise applications stack for local app development but it simply died when excel became more feature rich and when companies needed more than MS Access could offer.
It basically came to the point where there was little real use for MS Access.
Main reasoning:
A far more likely reason, and one which I believe is the true cause, is that there is relatively little demand for desktop databases:* there is a non-trivial degree of tech knowledge needed to run and maintain them
* they are tied to the desktop, and not ubiquitously accessible
In short, people want to focus on the task (running their household; keep track of collections; running their small business; logging inventory; etc) and not the technical means of accomplishing that task
This is all about a collapse in demand, and a shift to an alternative that better suits the needs and desires of the end-users.
It has nothing to do with "capitalism" ruining things. (Side note - the author has not defined capitalism, and I don't think it actually means what he/she thinks it does.)
Edited to add: there are still many desktop database programs offered to users. If there were still a huge demand for them, they would outcompete the supposedly evil industry products that so upset the author.