3 ms·

Popularity is a quality in its own right. If something is popular, there are experts who know how to deal with the issues. There are clients who need issues sol

Popularity is a quality in its own right. If something is popular, there are experts who know how to deal with the issues. There are clients who need issues solved. There is a market. Just take SAP, probably a pile of garbage in terms of quality, but it's paying its consultants handsomely and customers keep rolling in.

eeZah7Ux 8y ago
I'm talking about "quality" as uncountable not about "a quality" (countable). "quality: general excellence of standard or level."
jondubois 8y ago
>> If something is popular, there are experts who know how to deal with the issues It is implied here that the product must have issues which are so complicated that you need experts to solve them. I think it's often the case that hype is not correlated with quality, it's correlated with marketing, social networks, perverse financial interests, click farms, voting rings, etc...
- zeroname 8y ago
  > It is implied here that the product must have issues which are so complicated that you need experts to solve them. No it isn't. It's orthogonal. If there aren't any issues requiring experts, that's great. If there are issues that require experts, there better be some experts available. > I think it's often the case that hype is not correlated with quality... Hype isn't the same as popularity. Hype helps popularity. I'm not saying you should jump on the hype train right away. Let the hype do its job, wait for some critical mass to form.
marcosdumay 8y ago
> If something is popular, there are experts who know how to deal with the issues. Just because a lot of people use it, it does not mean that any good people do. Some technologies are very good in selecting novices only, and some others in selecting experts only. The first ones will always be more popular. In fact, the average "expertness" of the documentation for the tech and its ecosystem is one of the things I pay most attention to when selecting tools. I've said "expertness" here because I have no better term for it, it does not mean extensive, correct, complete, or any such usual quality. It's more related to "are advanced uses documented?", "is it at the correct level of abstraction?", "are the examples for doing hype or real things?", "do the descriptions pose the proper point of view so they become simple?", and stuff like that.

eeZah7Ux 8y ago

I'm talking about "quality" as uncountable not about "a quality" (countable). "quality: general excellence of standard or level."

jondubois 8y ago

>> If something is popular, there are experts who know how to deal with the issues It is implied here that the product must have issues which are so complicated that you need experts to solve them. I think it's often the case that hype is not correlated with quality, it's correlated with marketing, social networks, perverse financial interests, click farms, voting rings, etc...

zeroname 8y ago
> It is implied here that the product must have issues which are so complicated that you need experts to solve them. No it isn't. It's orthogonal. If there aren't any issues requiring experts, that's great. If there are issues that require experts, there better be some experts available. > I think it's often the case that hype is not correlated with quality... Hype isn't the same as popularity. Hype helps popularity. I'm not saying you should jump on the hype train right away. Let the hype do its job, wait for some critical mass to form.

marcosdumay 8y ago

> If something is popular, there are experts who know how to deal with the issues. Just because a lot of people use it, it does not mean that any good people do. Some technologies are very good in selecting novices only, and some others in selecting experts only. The first ones will always be more popular. In fact, the average "expertness" of the documentation for the tech and its ecosystem is one of the things I pay most attention to when selecting tools. I've said "expertness" here because I have no better term for it, it does not mean extensive, correct, complete, or any such usual quality. It's more related to "are advanced uses documented?", "is it at the correct level of abstraction?", "are the examples for doing hype or real things?", "do the descriptions pose the proper point of view so they become simple?", and stuff like that.