Imagine for a moment that you produce a product. Your product is not only popular, some would even consider it necessary. There is no practical regulation on what you charge for your product. Now, imagine that the popularity/necessity of your product convinces politicians that they should make it easier for people to buy your product through subsidies. Yet, there are still no regulations on what you charge. Would you raise your prices?
This is simple economics. A presidential candidate promises that the government will provide everyone who wants to buy your product a $4,000 subsidy every year in order to make it easier to purchase your product. Would you raise your prices?
After all, there's more money available to buy your product. In fact, there are billions of dollars in subsidies made available in taxpayer supplied grants, cheap loans and other methods to make it easier to buy your product. Oh, by the way, you don't have to pay taxes on what you bring in. Would you raise your prices?
Simple economics tell us that if there is more money available to buy a specific product then the price for that product will rise if there is no pricing regulation.
Welcome to the world of higher education in the United States. The producers (the universities) are free to set whatever price they want. As costs go higher, politicians fall all over themselves to throw more money to the consumer to make it easier to buy the product. How can anyone be surprised that the price of the product continues to rise?
Now the worst of it. Many of the private institutions have billions of dollars in cash and are earning tremendous sums of tax-free money on their cash. Yet, with all the cash the private universities have, you, the taxpayer, continue to subsidize other people so they can go to those schools. These schools continue to raise their prices because of all the subsidies that you, the taxpayer, continue to lavish upon them.
Will this change? Can this change? Perhaps it has started to change. Stanford's endowment grew last year by 22% to $17.1 billion. Stanford is now dropping tuition charges for students who come from families earning less than $100,000 per year.
Stanford deserves a round of applause for this first move.
The institution of higher-learning in this country, however, deserves continued, increasing pressure regarding their pricing as long as taxpayers subsidize their products. Personally, I think the universities should charge whatever they want for tuition. But I also think I shouldn't have to subsidize their consumers so they can afford whatever outrageous price the universities choose.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Dave's Product Reviews
I've been bored lately. There's really not a lot going on in the software world at the moment. We see the occasional acquisition but we seem to be in more of a stage of fine evolution rather than gross level revolution. So I've had a chance to play with some stuff and I thought I'd share my findings.
I have a fairly new computer (well, new for me, it's about a year old) that came with Vista somethingorother pre-installed. I say somethingorother because Vista has so many different versions that I can no longer keep track. This is one of many computers at my house running lots of different OS's - Mac, Linux, Windows/XP. All doing their own things. The Vista machine, however, is really one of a kind. It appears that many of the operations that I need to perform I need to confirm many, many times. After clicking on all of the "are you sure" buttons the screen goes black, everything hesitates and a final confirmation comes up asking me if I'm "really, really sure". Apparently, Vista's new security method is to ask as many times as possible before doing something dangerous. There are, of course, exceptions. The other day Microsoft's One-Care asked if I wanted it to clean up some un-needed startup programs. Knowing the number of confirmation levels I would go through I said yes, expecting it to show me the list of startup programs. Instead, it blithely deleted One-Care as a startup program with no further warning. Everyone's read about Vista everywhere else but I thought I would rate it anyway as Spectacularly Crappy.
The next product on my list is my Microsoft XBox 360. Besides the fact that it heats my bedroom to uncomfortable levels, it's extremely noisy and prone to repeatedly needing to be restarted. I also have a Sony PS3 which is very quiet and hasn't yet needed a restart. Again, Microsoft's products come in at the Spectacularly Crappy level.
Years ago I had two Unix servers in my office to conduct some testing for NIST related to the SQL standard. One of the vendors came in to ask if I had any feedback on their server. I told them they could do a lot to reduce the noise level as it sounded much like a hovercraft about to take off. I shut it down so they could hear the sound level of the other machine as a means of comparison. Once there machine was shut down they asked me to start up the other so they could hear the difference and they were quite disappointed when I told them it was already running. This is what that XBox 360 is like - a frikkin' hovercraft about to take off. My wife can hear the fans down the hall and talks about how peaceful it seems when I finally shut it off.
I mention the comparison because I was once asked by stock analysts my thoughts on Microsoft stock. I told them that I didn't see a strong future for Microsoft for back-end IT operations (I still don't) but that if they were bullish on Microsoft because of the consumer market then I couldn't provide a strong reason to disagree.
Today I'm sure Microsoft is incapable of doing anything innovative and I suspect that they really can't do anything competent either. From failures to force their products as standards, to XBox 360 to Vista to HD-DVD they keep coming up with the same level of product review from across their markets: Spectacularly Crappy. Have they no shame? How embarrassing it must be to be involved with any of these products or the company that produces them.
When I grew frustrated with both Vista and XBox I starting watching TV. Lo and behold there are now a series of Ford cars that have Sync powered by Microsoft to do things like listen to music or make telephone calls. WTF. My wife listens to me cuss out Microsoft's products almost every day; there's no way she would ever let me drive down the road attempting to get a car to play my music instead of hers. I can see it now, cruising down the road and saying, "Play Johnny Cash" and all of a sudden having Yanni come up. I'd probably just drive off a bridge.
Why would anyone want to take the frustration they experience in front of a Windows PC or an XBox 360 and transplant it inside of their car.
The problem is that Microsoft doesn't appear to see it. Each issue is isolated and completely unrelated. The reality is that all of these issues are evidence of a company out of touch with the market and with themselves.
I have a fairly new computer (well, new for me, it's about a year old) that came with Vista somethingorother pre-installed. I say somethingorother because Vista has so many different versions that I can no longer keep track. This is one of many computers at my house running lots of different OS's - Mac, Linux, Windows/XP. All doing their own things. The Vista machine, however, is really one of a kind. It appears that many of the operations that I need to perform I need to confirm many, many times. After clicking on all of the "are you sure" buttons the screen goes black, everything hesitates and a final confirmation comes up asking me if I'm "really, really sure". Apparently, Vista's new security method is to ask as many times as possible before doing something dangerous. There are, of course, exceptions. The other day Microsoft's One-Care asked if I wanted it to clean up some un-needed startup programs. Knowing the number of confirmation levels I would go through I said yes, expecting it to show me the list of startup programs. Instead, it blithely deleted One-Care as a startup program with no further warning. Everyone's read about Vista everywhere else but I thought I would rate it anyway as Spectacularly Crappy.
The next product on my list is my Microsoft XBox 360. Besides the fact that it heats my bedroom to uncomfortable levels, it's extremely noisy and prone to repeatedly needing to be restarted. I also have a Sony PS3 which is very quiet and hasn't yet needed a restart. Again, Microsoft's products come in at the Spectacularly Crappy level.
Years ago I had two Unix servers in my office to conduct some testing for NIST related to the SQL standard. One of the vendors came in to ask if I had any feedback on their server. I told them they could do a lot to reduce the noise level as it sounded much like a hovercraft about to take off. I shut it down so they could hear the sound level of the other machine as a means of comparison. Once there machine was shut down they asked me to start up the other so they could hear the difference and they were quite disappointed when I told them it was already running. This is what that XBox 360 is like - a frikkin' hovercraft about to take off. My wife can hear the fans down the hall and talks about how peaceful it seems when I finally shut it off.
I mention the comparison because I was once asked by stock analysts my thoughts on Microsoft stock. I told them that I didn't see a strong future for Microsoft for back-end IT operations (I still don't) but that if they were bullish on Microsoft because of the consumer market then I couldn't provide a strong reason to disagree.
Today I'm sure Microsoft is incapable of doing anything innovative and I suspect that they really can't do anything competent either. From failures to force their products as standards, to XBox 360 to Vista to HD-DVD they keep coming up with the same level of product review from across their markets: Spectacularly Crappy. Have they no shame? How embarrassing it must be to be involved with any of these products or the company that produces them.
When I grew frustrated with both Vista and XBox I starting watching TV. Lo and behold there are now a series of Ford cars that have Sync powered by Microsoft to do things like listen to music or make telephone calls. WTF. My wife listens to me cuss out Microsoft's products almost every day; there's no way she would ever let me drive down the road attempting to get a car to play my music instead of hers. I can see it now, cruising down the road and saying, "Play Johnny Cash" and all of a sudden having Yanni come up. I'd probably just drive off a bridge.
Why would anyone want to take the frustration they experience in front of a Windows PC or an XBox 360 and transplant it inside of their car.
The problem is that Microsoft doesn't appear to see it. Each issue is isolated and completely unrelated. The reality is that all of these issues are evidence of a company out of touch with the market and with themselves.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Has the NFL gone insane?
There's a bunch of news about how the National Football League is prohibiting churches from allowing people to gather to watch the super bowl if the display for the set is greater than 55" diagonally. I first heard about it in a Washington Post article that was picked up on Slashdot.
The law in question is the U.S. Copyright law and it does state that an establishment may not display copyrighted works on an audiovisual device with a diagonal measurement greater than 55 inches. The code even states how many such devices (1) may be in a single room and how many total (4) may be in the establishment.
Of course, this is a very fascinating story that make's for fun reading and creates a certain amount of disgust within me related to the state of intellectual property laws in this country.
I'm not sure what the fuss is about though. The U.S. Copyright law also defines an establishment as "...a store, shop, or any similar place of business open to the general public for the primary purpose of selling goods or services...". The last I checked churches don't have the primary purpose of selling goods or services.
I don't think the NFL would ever sue a church for showing the super bowl on a screen larger than 55 inches - there couldn't be anything much dumber than that. On the other hand I'm getting pretty sick and tired of intellectual property "owners" attempting to impose more restrictions than already exist. The concept of me being some type of NFL licensee as a result of watching a game on my T.V. is grossly ridiculous. The intellectual property elite are attempting to create an ownership environment which simply doesn't exist. They seem to think that if they say something often enough then it will become truth. We all need to shout back that they're full of it.
This is this weekend's biggest WTF.
The law in question is the U.S. Copyright law and it does state that an establishment may not display copyrighted works on an audiovisual device with a diagonal measurement greater than 55 inches. The code even states how many such devices (1) may be in a single room and how many total (4) may be in the establishment.
Of course, this is a very fascinating story that make's for fun reading and creates a certain amount of disgust within me related to the state of intellectual property laws in this country.
I'm not sure what the fuss is about though. The U.S. Copyright law also defines an establishment as "...a store, shop, or any similar place of business open to the general public for the primary purpose of selling goods or services...". The last I checked churches don't have the primary purpose of selling goods or services.
I don't think the NFL would ever sue a church for showing the super bowl on a screen larger than 55 inches - there couldn't be anything much dumber than that. On the other hand I'm getting pretty sick and tired of intellectual property "owners" attempting to impose more restrictions than already exist. The concept of me being some type of NFL licensee as a result of watching a game on my T.V. is grossly ridiculous. The intellectual property elite are attempting to create an ownership environment which simply doesn't exist. They seem to think that if they say something often enough then it will become truth. We all need to shout back that they're full of it.
This is this weekend's biggest WTF.
A Family That Understands
This is one of the christmas presents my daughter gave me this past year. Now, is this a family that understands me, or what? That thing in the background is, of course, Sammy.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Corn chips, cherries, death and monkeys
I've been doing nothing of late, or so it seems. I've certainly not been productive in the usual sense of the word. Oh, I've been working on my golf swing, getting my handicap back down (currently at 7.9), visiting with some of my friends and hanging out, mostly in Arizona.
My parents are visiting right now and that leads to the usual level of angst. Of course, no visit from my parents would be complete without the trip down memory lane. It started at lunch today at the house. We were standing around the kitchen and my mother was eating a corn chip and my father said, "If you eat those you'll turn into a monkey."
I'd heard the saying a thousand times and ignored it just as I had all the other times. But my wife, Wendy, was curious. I had told her that somewhere in everything my dad says is some truth and she couldn't help but ask him where that one came from.
"Years ago," he began, "they did a study on the preservatives used in fried snack foods and found that it could cause hair to grow all over your body." I was ignoring the entire conversation. My mother had her usual look of scorn having to be subjected to this "scientific" explanation of how one transforms into a monkey simply by eating corn chips. And my father was simply enjoying the traditional family gathering.
Of course, Wendy wanted to know more. My father asked me to tell her about cherries so I did.
When I was very young, probably about six or seven, my two younger sisters and I found the Maraschino cherries in the refrigerator. We delighted in their sweet taste and quickly consumed all that were there. My father walked into the kitchen, looked at us and said one thing before turning around and leaving, "If you eat more than one of those a day you'll die."
We were stunned. We had each consumed a good half-dozen of the luscious treats. We stared at each other wondering who would be the first to go. It wasn't until years later that we learned the issue had to do with a food coloring with alleged links to all kinds of bad things. I'm still here and my sisters are still here though I don't think any of us eat Maraschino cherries any longer.
My parents are visiting right now and that leads to the usual level of angst. Of course, no visit from my parents would be complete without the trip down memory lane. It started at lunch today at the house. We were standing around the kitchen and my mother was eating a corn chip and my father said, "If you eat those you'll turn into a monkey."
I'd heard the saying a thousand times and ignored it just as I had all the other times. But my wife, Wendy, was curious. I had told her that somewhere in everything my dad says is some truth and she couldn't help but ask him where that one came from.
"Years ago," he began, "they did a study on the preservatives used in fried snack foods and found that it could cause hair to grow all over your body." I was ignoring the entire conversation. My mother had her usual look of scorn having to be subjected to this "scientific" explanation of how one transforms into a monkey simply by eating corn chips. And my father was simply enjoying the traditional family gathering.
Of course, Wendy wanted to know more. My father asked me to tell her about cherries so I did.
When I was very young, probably about six or seven, my two younger sisters and I found the Maraschino cherries in the refrigerator. We delighted in their sweet taste and quickly consumed all that were there. My father walked into the kitchen, looked at us and said one thing before turning around and leaving, "If you eat more than one of those a day you'll die."
We were stunned. We had each consumed a good half-dozen of the luscious treats. We stared at each other wondering who would be the first to go. It wasn't until years later that we learned the issue had to do with a food coloring with alleged links to all kinds of bad things. I'm still here and my sisters are still here though I don't think any of us eat Maraschino cherries any longer.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Schadenfreude
From Wikipedia, Schadenfreude is a German word meaning "pleasure taken from someone else's misfortune."
I'm experiencing immense amounts of Schadenfreude. Normally, I feel a lot of sympathy and a bit of empathy for those who have misfortune visited upon them. But, not today, not earlier this week and certainly not tomorrow for SCO. I am gleeful about SCO's misfortunes of late.
For those of you who haven't heard, SCO has filed for bankruptcy. I was immediately reminded of the Wizard of Oz film and the singing of "Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead." Of course, while too much schadenfreude is probably not good for one's immortal soul I'm going to continue to take pleasure in this particular delight just a bit longer.
On the golf course we use the phrase, "There's a lot of golf left." It means that no matter how well ahead one is there are still plenty of opportunities to derail the progress. There's still a lot of golf left to play with SCO but we're certainly nearing the end of this particular disaster.
Some of the articles are pretty funny such as this one that says that SCO blames Linux for their failure. What's particularly ironic about this particular article is that I thought that SCO was going to be a Linux company before their management team completely screwed up. I remember meeting with Darl and company at one of their customer meetings years ago and working with them to help make SCO a successful Linux company. Once they turned their back on Linux and made their sensationalized allegations they just couldn't understand why no one wanted to do business with them. They couldn't understand why those of us committed to open-source and Linux wouldn't return their phone calls.
Sheer idiocy is never easy to watch. One feels embarassed and wants to turn away when witnessing fellow humans make asses of themselves.
SCO's board chose to keep Darl and the other leaders who chose this disastrous strategy. As a result, the board, the managers and the shareholders deserve all that they get which, hopefully, will be nothing.
I guess I'm in a movie kind of mood but I'm also reminded of the opening to Trainspotting. The opening narrative sets the stage for the entire movie as Mark "Rent-Boy" Renton describes his reasons for choosing heroin instead of life.
Darl's opening narrative could be, "Choose success. Choose a business plan. Choose a top team. Choose a passion. Choose good relations, low costs and a future for my employees. Choose a starter product with a future. Choose a big idea with a range of options. Choose products with matching support. Choose happy customers and building a stellar reputation. Choose a future based on a sound foundation...But why would I want to do a thing like that? I chose not to choose success. I chose something else. And the reasons? There are no reasons. Who needs reasons when you've got Boies, Schiller & Flexner?"
I'm experiencing immense amounts of Schadenfreude. Normally, I feel a lot of sympathy and a bit of empathy for those who have misfortune visited upon them. But, not today, not earlier this week and certainly not tomorrow for SCO. I am gleeful about SCO's misfortunes of late.
For those of you who haven't heard, SCO has filed for bankruptcy. I was immediately reminded of the Wizard of Oz film and the singing of "Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead." Of course, while too much schadenfreude is probably not good for one's immortal soul I'm going to continue to take pleasure in this particular delight just a bit longer.
On the golf course we use the phrase, "There's a lot of golf left." It means that no matter how well ahead one is there are still plenty of opportunities to derail the progress. There's still a lot of golf left to play with SCO but we're certainly nearing the end of this particular disaster.
Some of the articles are pretty funny such as this one that says that SCO blames Linux for their failure. What's particularly ironic about this particular article is that I thought that SCO was going to be a Linux company before their management team completely screwed up. I remember meeting with Darl and company at one of their customer meetings years ago and working with them to help make SCO a successful Linux company. Once they turned their back on Linux and made their sensationalized allegations they just couldn't understand why no one wanted to do business with them. They couldn't understand why those of us committed to open-source and Linux wouldn't return their phone calls.
Sheer idiocy is never easy to watch. One feels embarassed and wants to turn away when witnessing fellow humans make asses of themselves.
SCO's board chose to keep Darl and the other leaders who chose this disastrous strategy. As a result, the board, the managers and the shareholders deserve all that they get which, hopefully, will be nothing.
I guess I'm in a movie kind of mood but I'm also reminded of the opening to Trainspotting. The opening narrative sets the stage for the entire movie as Mark "Rent-Boy" Renton describes his reasons for choosing heroin instead of life.
Darl's opening narrative could be, "Choose success. Choose a business plan. Choose a top team. Choose a passion. Choose good relations, low costs and a future for my employees. Choose a starter product with a future. Choose a big idea with a range of options. Choose products with matching support. Choose happy customers and building a stellar reputation. Choose a future based on a sound foundation...But why would I want to do a thing like that? I chose not to choose success. I chose something else. And the reasons? There are no reasons. Who needs reasons when you've got Boies, Schiller & Flexner?"
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Bandon Dunes
I'm back from another glorious week at Bandon Dunes. I participate every year in Brian Henninger's Fireside Chat pro-am at Bandon Dunes and it's one of the best golf experiences I know of.
I was invited four years ago as a guest of a friend and I've been going back every year. It's a simple formula. Brian gets 32 amateurs and 8 PGA pros and we break into teams to play a "fun" tournament/contest and the pro-am. I've had the pleasure of playing with Kirk Triplett, Paul Goydos, Chris Smith and Charlie Wi.
The first two years my group won the pro-am. The last two years I won the "fun" contest - a closest to the pin contest last year and a three-hole par-3 contest this year.
For those of you who know me, you know that golf is one of the biggest things I enjoy. I get to meet new people, go outside and attempt to shoot a better score than my previous attempts.
Bandon Dunes is one of my favorite places to play, walking is pretty much mandatory and caddies are strongly encouraged. This year Tom Olson was my caddie and he spent a week helping me play. Playing with a caddie makes for an interesting experience. A good caddie will get to know your game and will encourage you to play the right club. A good caddie will actually become a team-mate and will get just as excited at a good shot and will know just how to change the mood when the inevitable bad shot comes along. Tom did a great job this year and by the end of the week he pretty much knew my game and how to guide me through the course.
If you love golf and ever get a chance to get to the southern coast of Oregon, be sure to check out Bandon Dunes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)