[skydhash]

> Software is just means to an end. Data and data transformation is what people want. Software has sellable dollar value only because creating the software to do the data transformation has had real associated cost. I.e anyone who wanted a particular data transformation had to pay to get the software that does it.

I do agree with you on that point.

> If anyone can create "photoshop" with minimal cost and there are thousands of said "photoshop" apps what will be the retail sell value of those apps. Close to zero.

This is the point that I cannot agree with. Not anyone can create photoshop because of the amount of knowledge you need about the data and transformations that needs to be applied to get a specific result. And then make a coherent system around it. You can create isolated function just fine, just like a lot of people knows how to build a shed with planks and nails. But even when given all the materials and tools, only a few can build a skyscraper or a mansion.

That knowledge of how to create a coherent systems that does something well is the real cost of software. Producing code isn't it.

[samiv]

You're right and I agree with you to an extent. Also as of now the tools aren't quite intelligent enough for one to produce software of that complexity without having someone competent at the helm.

That being said what already exists was already enough to shutter the stock prices of many software companies precisely because the fear is that their clients will just re-create the software themselves instead of buying it from someone else.

I guess we'll see how this will pan out in the next few years.