4 ms·

This blog post is mainly about the tools developers use day-to-day while they're in coding mode. Tools and development processes do tend to be well thought out

This blog post is mainly about the tools developers use day-to-day while they're in coding mode. Tools and development processes do tend to be well thought out and efficient at MS. That's not really related to the organizational dynamics that come into play for planning products and features. That tends to be complicated, involving a lot of people, meetings, and debate. (I'm not defending it, just saying that's how it is.) That 14 steps isn't about a code change; it's about the end-to-end design, implementation, and shipping of a feature, expressed in the most detailed, far-reaching way possible, to make a point about how things operate in a huge organization. Both points of view are accurate, IMHO. When you're strictly coding, things are pretty efficient. Not too surprisingly, those were the times I enjoyed the most. But it's equally true that at MS, coding is only a small piece of a larger, somewhat slow-moving process. And sure, all that other overhead can get tedious, even exasperating at times. It's just a separate subject from what the OP is writing about here. The coding part is typically quite fun and autonomous.

latch 16y ago
I don't mean to drag this out, since I largely agree with what you are saying, and it's true that the OP seems to focus on that. However, his intro blurb specifically says that we are wrong in assuming that writing software is a "soul-crushing bureaucratic exercise." Which, as you point out, the post never really says anything more about.
- jasonlotito 16y ago
  Remember, the intro blurb is discussion all the articles he intends to write on the subject. Together, they intend to show you how the intro is true. As it stands, he has two articles on the topic. Most people are only reading the one (the one which is linked). Even in that, the introduction is a common introduction for all the pieces (the two so far, so I imagine the others as well). That the original article focuses on coding doesn't mean he's ignoring other areas. Rather, that other areas simply haven't been written about.

latch 16y ago

I don't mean to drag this out, since I largely agree with what you are saying, and it's true that the OP seems to focus on that. However, his intro blurb specifically says that we are wrong in assuming that writing software is a "soul-crushing bureaucratic exercise." Which, as you point out, the post never really says anything more about.

jasonlotito 16y ago
Remember, the intro blurb is discussion all the articles he intends to write on the subject. Together, they intend to show you how the intro is true. As it stands, he has two articles on the topic. Most people are only reading the one (the one which is linked). Even in that, the introduction is a common introduction for all the pieces (the two so far, so I imagine the others as well). That the original article focuses on coding doesn't mean he's ignoring other areas. Rather, that other areas simply haven't been written about.