3 ms·
If the money they need to spend is less than that 2%, why WOULDN'T they spend the money?
by rrdharan 6y ago
If the money they need to spend is less than that 2%, why WOULDN'T they spend the money?
- jedberg 6y agoThe overhead of hiring people. The overhead of managing an extra team. The overhead of extra QA. The overhead of triaging extra bugs. There are a lot of costs associated with backwards compatibility with very little payoff if it doesn't mean a lot to the bottom line.
- rrdharan 6y agoSure. Note that 2% of $25B is $500M. Companies of all sizes (even FAAMNG) will act to protect that kind of existing revenue. And my point was that you can do all of the things you listed for less than $500M; probably for less than $250M. Developers are more expensive than they used to be but $100M+ still goes a pretty long way.