3 ms·
It's frankly bizarre to have a knee-jerk reaction that new technology is worse. New technology is probably better, given that it was created by people who had m
by dodobirdlord 8y ago
It's frankly bizarre to have a knee-jerk reaction that new technology is worse. New technology is probably better, given that it was created by people who had more context about both problems and solutions than was available when older technology was created. When I hear people talking about doing the same thing for 10 years I wonder what problem they are working on that could be so complex that in 10 years they have not managed lights-out automation for it. My suspicion is that attitudes like yours are not only wrong but also massively destructive of value.
- indigo945 8y agoGoogle's search engine is more than 10 years old, yet Google is still hiring engineers. Why is that? Should they not have managed lights-out automation for it? More importantly, the world changes and software has to change with it. An accounting system will need to be fitted to changing regulatory frameworks in the future. That knowledge is the basis of good application design. Schemaamnesia databases with highly-scalable vendor-locked PaaS peripherals that are constantly changing also require constant developer attention, but do not rise to that challenge.
- hartleybrody 8y agoI completely disagree. All new technology goes through a pruning phase for the first few years where people realize whether it's worthwhile or not. It's like natural selection, only the fittest survive. A technology that's been around for decades and is still considered a viable candidate will be much more reliable, documented, mature, bugfree... than some new library that is untested hasn't been worn smooth over time.