Couldn't agree more as a manager for ~25 years. Engineers, and I am one, a decent one, love the new shiny stuff. Me too. As a manager who has to ship product

Couldn't agree more as a manager for ~25 years. Engineers, and I am one, a decent one, love the new shiny stuff. Me too. As a manager who has to ship product that works? Not so much. That made me switch gears. My team used to joke that if it happened in Unix after 1980 I don't like it. That's not true, we used mmap, and a bunch of other stuff that happened later but the docs I used to program were old. I let new stuff in grudgingly. I think it worked. We're dead so there is that (BitKeeper) but we had an almost 20 year profitable run with no VC in the valley so there is that too. Our support was over the top, I would challenge you to find a company that had as many users as we did and had the support that we did. Our 24/7 average response time was something like 22 minutes and the only reason it was that long was we went to bed. When we were awake the response time was measured in seconds or single digit minutes. I credit the response time to being boring. No shiny stuff, just stuff that works, be boring. The mantra was "drive towards zero support costs, that's how we scale". That didn't mean not support people, it meant make the product so good that there were no support issues. We didn't get there but we got closer than a lot of companies. tl;dr: don't beat your management / leadership up so much for not wanting the shiny new stuff. You are in this to make money or change the world or something. All of those somethings are not well served by unproven new stuff. If you have to use new stuff choose very very carefully and think about the costs.