What actually is software? It’s obviously not a physical thing you can point at. If I imagine a specific piece of software, where does the software stop and not-software begin?
Back to software? What is software? Maybe it’s the compiled binary artifact? An executable or DLL or JAR file. But is that really what software is? Software is a living, growing, changing thing – a single binary is merely a snapshot at a given point in time.
Perhaps then software includes the source code. Without the source code, what we have is dead software – a single binary that can never (easily) be changed. Sure, we could in theory reverse engineer something resembling source code from the binary, but for any reasonably sized piece of software, would making anything beyond a trivial change be feasible, without the original source?
Even with the source code, could I just pick up, say, the source to Chrome or Excel and start hacking away? It seems unlikely – I’d need to spend time familiarising myself with the code and reading documentation. So maybe documentation is part of what makes software.
Even better than reading documentation I’d talk to other developers who are already familiar with the code – they would be able to explain it to me and answer my questions. Perhaps even more importantly, developers would be able to explain why certain things are the way they are – this tells the story of the software, the history of how it got to be the way it is. The decisions taken along the way, the mistakes made and the paths not taken.
So the knowledge developers have of how the software works and how it got there is part of what makes up software. What other knowledge makes up software? How about the process for releasing a new version? Without that knowledge modified source code is useless. To be real, live software new versions need to get into the hands of users.
When it comes to interacting with the real world, how much of that context is part of what defines the software? Look at Uber, for example – without physical cars, what use is the software? In some sense, the physical cars and their drivers are part of a software stack.
But is software even a single thing, at a single scale? Is the web front end a single piece of software? Without its backend service it is rendered useless. Does that make it a single piece of software or two?
How about as software evolves? Does it become something different, unique from the software that went before? The original version is part of the history of the software, but it isn’t distinct from it. Only if the old version was forked can we end up with a new piece of software – at this point their histories diverge. Over time they will adapt to subtly different contexts, have different dependencies, different decisions and goals: they will become two different pieces of software.
What about if software is re-written? Imagine the team responsible for the back-end service decide the only solution to their technical debt problem is a re-write. So they begin re-writing it from scratch. Eventually, they switch over to the new version – the old one is archived, only kept in version control for the curious. Is this a new piece of software? Or logically just a new version? The software stack still performs the same overall purpose, there’s still only one back-end service. The original, debt-laden version has become part of the history of the software: we don’t have two systems – we have one. This suggests that the actual source code is not what makes software.
If software isn’t the source code, what is it? It can’t be the team that owns it, although team members may come and go the software lives on. It isn’t the documentation either – the documentation could be re-written and the software would live on. Software is defined by its context but it is more than its context and processes.
Software is all these things and none of them. Just like Peugeot, software is a fiction we all believe in. We all pretend we know what we mean when we talk about “software”, but what actually is it?
If software is anything it is a story. It is the history of how the code got to where it is today: the decisions that were taken, the context it sits within, the components it interacts with. Documentation is an attempt to preserve this history; processes an attempt to codify lessons learned.
If software is a story, the team are the medium through which the story is kept alive. If you’ve ever seen what happens when a new team takes over legacy software, you’ll know what happens when the story dies: zombie software, not quite dead but not quite alive; still evolving and changing, but full of risk that any change could bring about disaster.
What is software? Software is a story: a story of how this got to be the way it is, whatever “this” might be.
| Published on Java Code Geeks with permission by David Green, partner at our JCG program. See the original article here: What is software? Opinions expressed by Java Code Geeks contributors are their own. |
What about the difference between software and a (technical) product? A product for me is something which solves a problem for a specific group of persons. The product is described by its use cases and test cases. How is the relation with the software? Is the software a tool to solve the problems described in he product? Should we make ourselves thoughts about what is a software or what is a product? I want to solve challenges with software and that’s why we need technology. So I would concentrate more on the product and it’s use cases more than in… Read more »
Thank you so much for giving software development knowledge us