3 ms·
Perhaps this is a good example of how much of that professional "seasoning" is actually unnecessary or gets in the way of building successful products and high-
by brown9-2 16y ago
Perhaps this is a good example of how much of that professional "seasoning" is actually unnecessary or gets in the way of building successful products and high-caliber responsible teams, i.e. "throwing over the wall to QA" etc.
edit: Can I ask why this is being downvoted? Because I am disagreeing with the parent poster? I don't think I am raising poor points or somehow not contributing to the discussion. Facebook seems to not do a lot of "standard" things because they view them as counter to their goals of building their product. I am merely stating that perhaps there is a lesson in there about the value of what some of the convential wisdom in our industry dictates.
- kenjackson 16y agoUpmodded... with that said, I do think that this is very industry dependent. They are a free product that people don't necessarily "rely" on. If status messages were severely delayed or dropped, it wouldn't be a huge deal (assuming they fixed it when noticed). There's very little that they can't fix after deployed, and they have no SLA with consumers (advertisers may be different). In essence they have 500 million testers. This is a bit harder to do with a database or compiler.
- kemiller 16y agoApp developers and other API users do in fact rely on them. Their unreliability is part of what's convincing many sites to rethink that.