3 ms·

Not any more. I chose my bank based on the quality of its phone app. I choose my hotels based on their ease of booking. We picked my wife's car based on its ab

Not any more. I chose my bank based on the quality of its phone app. I choose my hotels based on their ease of booking. We picked my wife's car based on its ability to connect to our phones. I've switched brokers because their web interface was so buggy. And on and on. If your employer can't provide a good quality interface then it won't be getting any of my business. Talking about switching CSS preprocessors is a red herring when so much enterprise software is shit.

PeterisP 5y ago
What I hear in your statements is that you're choosing companies based on the features or UX of their products, not because of the quality of their codebase, which is mostly not related to the things you describe. If the car had better quality code but did not yet have implemented the feature to connect to your phones, you would not have bought it - which is exactly the point the parent post was making.
felizuno 5y ago
Yeah but you didn't choose them because they used if/else clauses instead of switch statements. You chose those things because they have the features you want (that work regardless of how) without knowledge of how DRY a given layer of their stack is. This is fundamentally my point - that businesses work by offering the features people want that their competitors don't have yet, regardless of what those features look like under the hood. And regardless of how shitty enterprise software is (and I hate it plenty) it seems to be funding the paychecks of millions of people.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  >Yeah but you didn't choose them because they used if/else clauses instead of switch statements. No, but I will make choices based on systems that crash or have features that fail to work which is surprisingly common. As an example Windows XP was so insecure that it opened the door for Apple. Microsoft had to stop adding features and rewrite substantial portions of it for SP2.

PeterisP 5y ago

What I hear in your statements is that you're choosing companies based on the features or UX of their products, not because of the quality of their codebase, which is mostly not related to the things you describe. If the car had better quality code but did not yet have implemented the feature to connect to your phones, you would not have bought it - which is exactly the point the parent post was making.

felizuno 5y ago

Yeah but you didn't choose them because they used if/else clauses instead of switch statements. You chose those things because they have the features you want (that work regardless of how) without knowledge of how DRY a given layer of their stack is. This is fundamentally my point - that businesses work by offering the features people want that their competitors don't have yet, regardless of what those features look like under the hood. And regardless of how shitty enterprise software is (and I hate it plenty) it seems to be funding the paychecks of millions of people.

tonyedgecombe 5y ago
>Yeah but you didn't choose them because they used if/else clauses instead of switch statements. No, but I will make choices based on systems that crash or have features that fail to work which is surprisingly common. As an example Windows XP was so insecure that it opened the door for Apple. Microsoft had to stop adding features and rewrite substantial portions of it for SP2.