6 ms·
"With no legacy systems to maintain, and fewer old bugs to root out, their software is more robust and developers can spend more time on features that customers
by q-base 6y ago
"With no legacy systems to maintain, and fewer old bugs to root out, their software is more robust and developers can spend more time on features that customers want."
If there is one area where new systems will have a hard time against the old, then it is robustness. To say that newly developed systems are more robust than old is quite the stretch. The sole act of being maintained long enough to be called "legacy" points towards robustness.
- tsimionescu 6y agoThere are at least 2 different definitions of robustness that could be relevant here. The legacy systems are likely to cover many more business corner cases, which is a kind of robustness. However, legacy systems, developed before modern software engineering practices caught on in internal IT departments (no tests, no modularization, no QA, etc), are often very prone to crashes, freezes and all sorts of other bizarre behaviors, which is a different kind of robustness. Of course, I'm absolutely sure that newly written software is often lacking in both kinds of robustness, perhaps with the same frequency as legacy software. But often times, when a company is replacing a legacy system with a new one, this second kind of robustness is taken care of with priority.