3 ms·

I don't agree with this. As was pointed out here too, software changes in production all the time. This happens with Buildings too, but on a different time scal

I don't agree with this. As was pointed out here too, software changes in production all the time. This happens with Buildings too, but on a different time scale. Buildings that were made with forward layouts for HVAC and electrical systems will be easier to upgrade in the future. If you look at old buildings that had networking and such retrofitted in a visible and ugly fashion, I think its fair to say that you're looking at technical debt.

peterwwillis 9y ago
In the sense that the alternative is to demolish and build a new building, your example is technical debt. But your example is really an example of legacy systems. Sometimes, supporting the legacy system can be technical debt. But sometimes when people try to replace the legacy system, they spend a lot of time and money and end up costing way more than simply maintaining the legacy system. This is part of why some nuclear plants will continue to operate on PDP-11's until the year 2050. Technical debt isn't really debt if it's actually just a part of the cost of doing business. You design your system for its intended purpose, and if it's accomplishing that purpose well, you don't need a redesign. Don't break what doesn't need fixing.