3 ms·

I'd rather have simple software that does what I want.

• sz4kerto 10y ago
  Then either other people don't have the software what they want (because there are so many different needs when it comes to any domain) or the complexity is transferred to finding/evaluating the huge selection of software.
• etatoby 10y ago
  LOL that's called having your cake and eating it too, AKA impossible.
• felipeerias 10y ago
  Exactly. Our tools should not add a layer of unnecessary complexity on top of already complex domains. If anything, they should take complexity away so we can focus on what is most relevant for the goals that we want to achieve. A lot of configuration options come into existence not because they are actually useful, but because the team had a disagreement that they couldn't settle, or because writing code that just figured out the right thing to do would be too complex. Options should be a way of empowering the user, not simply offloading work to them. It's very important to realise that our goals are not just related to the concrete problem at hand, but include things like "get out of the way and don't make me feel stupid".
  • TeMPOraL 10y ago
    But then a lot of options exist because the domain itself is complex and can't be captured in a one-size-fits-all solution. The only way to make something both very simple and very useful for a domain is to cunningly cut out parts of the domain. The end result is a pretty, simple and opinionated tool that doesn't really solve anything for anyone, but sure looks good on screenshots.
    • thaeli 10y ago
      This. Most "disagreements a team can't settle" are rooted in fundamentally different use cases of a complex domain.