3 ms·
The one caveat is that there are times when the business realizes that their old workflows and features aren't what they now need. The rewrite becomes a new pro
by ebiester 9y ago
The one caveat is that there are times when the business realizes that their old workflows and features aren't what they now need. The rewrite becomes a new project competing with the old rather than a functional rewrite.
This is also fraught with peril. However, it is a different set of problems. In an ideal world, you have engineers who can make reasoned decisions.
However, if the company culture allowed one application to devolve into chaos, what will make the second application better?
- jacquesm 9y agoYou raise an excellent point and usually in tandem we educate management (not the tech people) on how they failed in their oversight and guidance role. The real problem of course is to let things slide this far in the first place. But that's an entirely different subject, for sure the two go hand-in-hand and often what you touch on is the major reason the original talent has long ago left the company. By the time we get called in it is 11:58 or thereabouts.
- typednothing 9y agoAt some point they'll junk the in-house program and buy something off the shelf.
- jacquesm 9y agoAssuming something off the shelf is available, yes. In fact, if something off the shelf is available we'll be happy to make that recommendation, too many companies that aren't software houses suddenly feel that they need to write everything from the ground up. And even companies that are software houses suffer from NIH more often than not. (Though, I have to say that in my experience in the last couple of years or so this is improving, it used to be that every company had their own in-house developed framework but now we see more and more standardization.)