2 ms·

I find it ironic that instead of adopting ND's unique technology, Sony shut it down and went with standard fare. In business, the platform with the most availab

I find it ironic that instead of adopting ND's unique technology, Sony shut it down and went with standard fare. In business, the platform with the most available "developers" usually wins out. It's very difficult to justify the training effort and cost for non-mainstream technology, even if it is demonstrably more productive. Easier to just hire twice as many staff.

pjmlp 4y ago
Which is why I always make the point most technology failures aren't because the tech wasn't up to it, rather human factor taking decisions. Another good example was while Midori was powering the Asian Bing infrastructure, Windows team was still asserting it wasn't production ready (see Joe Duffy keynot on RustConf). Our industry needs more dreamers and less bean counters.
- kaveh808 4y ago
  One reason I'm going the open source route is to work with like-minded people and have the freedom to dream. As I've probably made clear elsewhere in this posting, I can't make a business case for the project. Not one that an investor would buy.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    All the best for the project.
    - kaveh808 4y ago
      Thanks.
vfclists 4y ago
Im my view the true reason is that knowledge based companies see their knowledge workers as their greatest threat and competition, so prefer to channel their employees energies into technologies which make it hard for their employees to use to compete against them. If your employees are invested in Lisp rather than C++ how easy will it be for them to start up their own companies and compete with you if they need to hire an additional 10 C++ programmers rather than the 3 Lisp programmers they would require if you developed your product and thus their skillset in Lisp rather than C++? After seeing very effective tools mothballed over the years this is the only reason I can come up with. Just see how Javascript and HTML have been seen as the way of delivering program functionality to users over the last 25 years, and yet every two weeks a new Javascript framework is announced which promises to make web development easier. I mean how many years does it take to develop effective frameworks for software development? 25 years is time enough for a people to develop from blobs in the parents bodies to university graduates and with families of their own, and yet there is no end to new frameworks which promise to solve all web software development issues.
- kaveh808 4y ago
  My feeling is this is a consequence of the "worse is better" approach. Trying to shoehorn features which were not planned for in the initial design.

pjmlp 4y ago

Which is why I always make the point most technology failures aren't because the tech wasn't up to it, rather human factor taking decisions. Another good example was while Midori was powering the Asian Bing infrastructure, Windows team was still asserting it wasn't production ready (see Joe Duffy keynot on RustConf). Our industry needs more dreamers and less bean counters.

kaveh808 4y ago
One reason I'm going the open source route is to work with like-minded people and have the freedom to dream. As I've probably made clear elsewhere in this posting, I can't make a business case for the project. Not one that an investor would buy.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  All the best for the project.
  - kaveh808 4y ago
    Thanks.

vfclists 4y ago

Im my view the true reason is that knowledge based companies see their knowledge workers as their greatest threat and competition, so prefer to channel their employees energies into technologies which make it hard for their employees to use to compete against them. If your employees are invested in Lisp rather than C++ how easy will it be for them to start up their own companies and compete with you if they need to hire an additional 10 C++ programmers rather than the 3 Lisp programmers they would require if you developed your product and thus their skillset in Lisp rather than C++? After seeing very effective tools mothballed over the years this is the only reason I can come up with. Just see how Javascript and HTML have been seen as the way of delivering program functionality to users over the last 25 years, and yet every two weeks a new Javascript framework is announced which promises to make web development easier. I mean how many years does it take to develop effective frameworks for software development? 25 years is time enough for a people to develop from blobs in the parents bodies to university graduates and with families of their own, and yet there is no end to new frameworks which promise to solve all web software development issues.

kaveh808 4y ago
My feeling is this is a consequence of the "worse is better" approach. Trying to shoehorn features which were not planned for in the initial design.