3 ms·
require more expertise to solve in a way that doesn't require the application/clients to change. Surprise! IT is hard and requires experts. Either hire one, or
by mdekkers 8y ago
require more expertise to solve in a way that doesn't require the application/clients to change.
Surprise! IT is hard and requires experts. Either hire one, or become one, but either way, the idea that "nobody in my enterprise/company/team need to understand the details of how stuff works" is crazy. Imagine a car-mechanic shop where nobody knows how an engine works: "we plugged in the computer tool, and it said something is wrong with your engine. I guess you need a new one"
- zbentley 8y agoYes, it is. But tooling can improve that. For example: having worked on DB2 and Postgres, and I'd choose Postgres for any new work barring extremely unique constraints--not because it means "I don't have to understand the details of how stuff works", but because it exposes how stuff works in a more intelligible, powerful, and useful way. Tools improve. Sometimes they repeat past mistakes--I'd pick Postgres over Hadoop/HBase too, until considerable duress. But sometimes? Sometimes tools learn from past mistakes--use those tools. Not everyone complaining about the deficiencies of current-gen tools is doing so out of ignorance or laziness about their stack.