banner banner  

Some of the Basic Differences between the 
Physical CBD-Products and Software Products

It is extremely important to grasp unique differences and similarities between software products and physical products by objectively analyzing all the know facts and easily verifiable observations. It is extremely important to comprehend the fact: The designers of automobile (in automobile industry) deal with product models belong to just one product family, while designers of computers (in computing industry) deal with product models of computing devices (e.g. computers, smart-phones etc.).
However the designers of software products (in the software industry) deals with countless product models belong to countless product families such as compilers, games, word processors, banking, insurance, trading, supply-chain for retail or manufacturing, robotics, RDBMS, SAP, SAS, CASE-Tools or medical records. Furthermore hundreds of new kinds of software products are invented each year.
Please kindly note: Of course, many new kinds of physical products are being invented each year, such as the process of inventing and designing artificial-kidney presented in this very interesting YouTube video at: I am sure, the inventors of many of the successful products (e.g. cars or vacuum cleaner) in the market today must have gone through similar process for inventing, designing and building each of the products. For example, the Wright brothers must have gone through similar process for inventing, designing and building the first Airplane. It is absolutely essential to grasp the remarkable similarities between the new software products and such one-of-a-kind physical products (explained in this web page).
The design and development of a new software product is obviously different from designing and development of a new product-model from a crowded product family (e.g. cell-phone or automobiles), where mature product family means first models of the product introduced many decades or even a century ago and have been evolving ever since. Examples for crowded product family include automobile product-family or product family for cell-phones, where hundreds of new product models are introduced each year (in each product family).
Hence, the design and development of a new software product is obviously different from designing and development of a new product-model from a mature product family (e.g. automobiles or airplanes), where mature product family means first models of the product introduced many decades or even a century ago and have been evolving ever since.
The crowded or mature product families provide market conditions conducive for evolution of ecosystem for third party component vendors. Another incentive or factor supporting the ecosystem for reusable components is mass market (e.g. mass-production in step-2 of CBD-process), which provides an opportunity for each of the component vendors for selling millions of parts. For example, a maker of even simple break-pads (costing few dollars a part) for Honda Accord can expect to generate many millions of dollars of revenues from new cars from Honda as well as from authorized Honda car repair shops.
In this competitive market each of the makers of a product model must differentiate his model from competition. In automobile industry this is accomplished by custom designing core components such as engine, gearbox, while relying on third party vendors for non-core components such as auto-battery, CD-payer, dials, meters in dashboard, tires or break pads etc. The big auto makers also work closely with the third party component vendors for custom designing the non-core components. For example, the Honda Company likely works closely with the above vendor for break-pads to custom design the break-pads for Honda Accord. Usually in case of automobiles, large core components custom designed constitutes about 80% and rest or non-core reusable components constitute about 20%.
On the other hand over 90% of the components in computers or cell phones are reusable (i.e. purchased from third party component vendors), where the makers of the product models use software operating systems and software applications to differentiate their products from the models from competition. The makers of smart-phones and computers can use software (e.g. OS and applications) instead of hardware-components to differentiate their models from competition. Because of this reason, it is hard to compare the design of the software products with the design of computing devices (e.g. cell-phones or computers) that can rely on highly-standardized components (e.g. CPU, DRAM or Flash memory) from 3rd-party vendors.
On the other hand, the vendors of software products must design custom components to differentiate respective product-model from competition, no differently from designers of a new model of automobile or designers of an experimental Jet-fighter. By analyzing these and all other knows facts, the design of large software products is more like designing one-of-a-kind large physical products, which requires custom designing over 90% of the large components. Likewise, design of software products is different from design of products from crowded or mature product families.
Another important difference is: The physical products are primarily built by using two kinds of parts (i) ingredient parts such as steel, metals, plastic, paint, rubber, silicon (e.g. to make computer chips), alloys, cement or bricks, and (ii) components or component-parts (CPs in short) such as CPU, DRAM, HardDrive, auto-battery, engine, gear-box, CD-player, dials or meters (in dashboard). In case of physical CBD-products, each CP is built by using ingredient-parts and/or other CPs as sub-CPs, where a product is said to be CBD-product, if it comprises multiple CPs.
Since the software is not constrained by physical attributes or laws of nature, it is possible to create many more kinds of parts than possible for the physical products. The software offers unlimited flexibility and possibilities for inventing many kinds of useful parts, where invention of each new kind of useful parts required describing accurate nature, methods for identifying, creating and using the kind of parts.
Hence there is no valid reason, why it is not possible to invent real software components that are equivalent to the physical components, if it is possible (i) to discover hidden nature and accurate description for identifying real software components (equivalent to the physical components) and (ii) to invent methods for creating real software components and for using the real software components for building software.
It is extremely important to objectively analyze facts, such as: nature restricted the kinds of physical parts that can be invented. But fortunately, nature gifted them extremely useful kind of parts, popularly known as components (or CPs). The software provided us unlimited flexibility (e.g. unconstrained by laws of nature or physical attributes such as weight), so we in software are forced to invent real software components equivalent to the physical components for achieving real CBSD (equivalent to CBD of physical products).
Inventing real software components is a very complex undertaking, which is nearly impossible to accomplish directly. So this web site takes indirect approach, by leveraging known facts or easily variable observations about the real CBD (of physical products) and then real components (e.g. physical active-components). For example, it is not complicated to grasp (i) the nature and methods of the real CBD widely used for designing and building a new product and (ii) providing an accurate description for an ideal CBD for physical products. On the other hand, it is a very complex endeavor to grasp hidden nature and accurate description of the real components. So this website relies on the accurate description for an ideal CBD for physical products and many known facts, such as no other kind of physical part except very special kind physical parts (popularly known as the components) can achieve the CBD-structure, where all the active-components universally share very unique set of hidden characteristics or properties.
The goal is to objectively analyze all the known facts for discovering the very unique set of unknown properties universally shared by all kinds of large physical components for grasping inherent nature and accurate description of the real components. This discovery and knowledge  is essential for identifying the software parts having the properties universally shared by the physical components. The designers of each software application can identify such software parts in the application and design each software-part no differently than real components (e.g. to achieve CBD-structure for software product).
One can find diverse species of CBD-products and employ highly diverse methods (if we examine at micro level), but all share two general methods at macro level (which are presented as CBD-structure and CBD-process). Therefore all the CBD-products (exist today or invited in future) likely employ a process logically similar to the CBD-process at macro level and comprise structures logically similar to the CBD-structure at macro level.
The real components (i.e. physical active-components) are highly diverse species, ranging from components for automobiles, airplanes to components for computing-devices, bio-medical devices. Even such highly diverse species universally share one or two essential characteristics or properties uniquely. It is absolutely essential to discover these mysterious unique essential properties for identifying such parts (exist in software) that can be designed as components (equivalent to the physical components) for enabling real CBD (e.g. achieving CBD-structure).
The ultimate goal is: Help the competent software engineer or designer to comprehend the inherent nature of real components by discovering accurate universal description for the real components, where the description can be defined by using a set comprising each and every characteristic (or property) absolutely essential for the real components (or for the species). That is: (i) It must be impossible to find a physical part that has all the absolutely essential properties in the set and yet not a component; and (ii) No part can be a component, if it doesn’t have even a single property present in the set (e.g. Such physical part can no longer be a component as soon as it looses even one essential property).
It is absolutely essential to discover the inherent nature and the essential properties of the real components for identifying software parts that can be designed as real software components (in the step-1 of the CBD-process) for achieving a structure equivalent to the CBD-structure.

Copy Right © 2013 SPPS Systems Pvt.Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
This Website presents patented and patent-pending Inventions and Discoveries