3 ms·

New features, fewer bugs, increased profitability... that is, towards the goals of pretty much any (software) company.

by unit91 9y ago

ZenoArrow 9y ago
> "New features, fewer bugs, increased profitability" Can you name me one IDE that has more features, fewer bugs and better profitability than Visual Studio? I respect that Microsoft are not at the top of all fields they're involved in (search, mobile, etc...), but they aren't exactly struggling to stay competitive with every product they create.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  They were definitely struggling with IE. Moving to Edge has brought them neck and neck again.
- unit91 9y ago
  I didn't say, nor do I think, that Microsoft has fewer features, more bugs, and lower profit than everybody else. Rather, that the goals of pretty much everyone in the software business are features, fewest bugs possible, and most profit possible. I'm not even sure I agree with the great-grandparent post that MSFT needs to jettison legacy. Frankly, I don't know enough about their numbers to have an informed opinion. My point was that it seems pretty clear what the poster meant by "move faster". So the question "to what?" isn't all that helpful.
  - ZenoArrow 9y ago
    > "My point was that it seems pretty clear what the poster meant by "move faster". So the question "to what?" isn't all that helpful." To be honest, I find that strange. Moving faster without setting goals about what you're moving faster for (other than profit) seems like a good recipe for dilution of focus. A company requires focus in order to maximise efficiency. Building up spare capacity just to buy time to run around like headless chickens seems like a wasted opportunity, from a business perspective.
usrusr 9y ago
For Microsoft, profitability depends quite a bit on people not leaving their comfort zone of "runs any old software thrown at it". If you are Microsoft, jettisoning legacy means jettisoning customers.

New features, fewer bugs, increased profitability... that is, towards the goals of pretty much any (software) company.

by unit91 9y ago

New features, fewer bugs, increased profitability... that is, towards the goals of pretty much any (software) company.

> "New features, fewer bugs, increased profitability" Can you name me one IDE that has more features, fewer bugs and better profitability than Visual Studio? I respect that Microsoft are not at the top of all fields they're involved in (search, mobile, etc...), but they aren't exactly struggling to stay competitive with every product they create.

dingo_bat 9y ago
They were definitely struggling with IE. Moving to Edge has brought them neck and neck again.
unit91 9y ago
I didn't say, nor do I think, that Microsoft has fewer features, more bugs, and lower profit than everybody else. Rather, that the goals of pretty much everyone in the software business are features, fewest bugs possible, and most profit possible. I'm not even sure I agree with the great-grandparent post that MSFT needs to jettison legacy. Frankly, I don't know enough about their numbers to have an informed opinion. My point was that it seems pretty clear what the poster meant by "move faster". So the question "to what?" isn't all that helpful.
- ZenoArrow 9y ago
  > "My point was that it seems pretty clear what the poster meant by "move faster". So the question "to what?" isn't all that helpful." To be honest, I find that strange. Moving faster without setting goals about what you're moving faster for (other than profit) seems like a good recipe for dilution of focus. A company requires focus in order to maximise efficiency. Building up spare capacity just to buy time to run around like headless chickens seems like a wasted opportunity, from a business perspective.

usrusr 9y ago

For Microsoft, profitability depends quite a bit on people not leaving their comfort zone of "runs any old software thrown at it". If you are Microsoft, jettisoning legacy means jettisoning customers.