4 ms·

I’m not convinced this works so great for Google. Some rewrites are very noticeable as a user, and things in the UI frequently shift around for no discernible r

I’m not convinced this works so great for Google. Some rewrites are very noticeable as a user, and things in the UI frequently shift around for no discernible reason. Perhaps worse, they seem unable to get below a certain level of bugginess in products like Google Maps and Gmail. Perhaps because a new round of rewrites always introduces new bugs before all of the old ones ever get fixed. Perhaps their metrics tell them that all of this is fine, I don’t know. But then, you have to realize Google has so much money they don’t really have to spend it very efficiently. For everyone else, this approach to rewrites seems like an extremely expensive way to produce software that’s not even all that great.

walshemj 8y ago
I saw this a BT where on system was rewritten in OWS (Oracle Web Services) used 15 Person Years and around a Million Quid - Not the best use of shareholders money. But some one got to tick some boxes on there promotion track
- heavenlyblue 8y ago
  Well, but that money was certainly not needed for someone else if it was so readily available.
  - walshemj 8y ago
    Like pay rises, funding more roles to allow more career progression or gasp retuning it to the share holders?
- polskibus 8y ago
  Many enterprises are rewriting their apps to the cloud stacks for no good reason, at a great capex and later opex.
stcredzero 8y ago
I’m not convinced this works so great for Google. Some rewrites are very noticeable as a user, and things in the UI frequently shift around for no discernible reason. Perhaps worse, they seem unable to get below a certain level of bugginess in products like Google Maps and Gmail. Perhaps because a new round of rewrites always introduces new bugs before all of the old ones ever get fixed. Perhaps their metrics tell them that all of this is fine, I don’t know. But then, you have to realize Google has so much money they don’t really have to spend it very efficiently. The user experience ranges between good to mediocre to bad, depending. Google is simply too rich and powerful to care. So long as the goose keeps laying the golden eggs, they can just keep going along and patting themselves on the back.
erik_seaberg 8y ago
As jwz put it, "It hardly seems worth even having a bug system if the frequency of from-scratch rewrites always outstrips the pace of bug fixing. Why not be honest and resign yourself to the fact that version 0.8 is followed by version 0.8, which is then followed by version 0.8?"

walshemj 8y ago

I saw this a BT where on system was rewritten in OWS (Oracle Web Services) used 15 Person Years and around a Million Quid - Not the best use of shareholders money. But some one got to tick some boxes on there promotion track

heavenlyblue 8y ago
Well, but that money was certainly not needed for someone else if it was so readily available.
- walshemj 8y ago
  Like pay rises, funding more roles to allow more career progression or gasp retuning it to the share holders?
polskibus 8y ago
Many enterprises are rewriting their apps to the cloud stacks for no good reason, at a great capex and later opex.

stcredzero 8y ago

I’m not convinced this works so great for Google. Some rewrites are very noticeable as a user, and things in the UI frequently shift around for no discernible reason. Perhaps worse, they seem unable to get below a certain level of bugginess in products like Google Maps and Gmail. Perhaps because a new round of rewrites always introduces new bugs before all of the old ones ever get fixed. Perhaps their metrics tell them that all of this is fine, I don’t know. But then, you have to realize Google has so much money they don’t really have to spend it very efficiently. The user experience ranges between good to mediocre to bad, depending. Google is simply too rich and powerful to care. So long as the goose keeps laying the golden eggs, they can just keep going along and patting themselves on the back.

erik_seaberg 8y ago

As jwz put it, "It hardly seems worth even having a bug system if the frequency of from-scratch rewrites always outstrips the pace of bug fixing. Why not be honest and resign yourself to the fact that version 0.8 is followed by version 0.8, which is then followed by version 0.8?"