3 ms·

> Uppity programmers calling themselves software "engineers" act in almost totally the opposite manner of a true engineering discipline. They hold "legacy" in c

> Uppity programmers calling themselves software "engineers" act in almost totally the opposite manner of a true engineering discipline. They hold "legacy" in contempt, and break things in the name of "progress" or "safety" at odds with their stated goals. They ignore the lessons of history, and keep re-inventing the same things every decade or two. The reason for that is that software is much easier to change than hardware. You cannot expect every person in the world to update their radio equipment every couple years - it's too expensive - but it's somewhat reasonable to expect people to install new software, especially if it can be done for free over the internet. It's just economics at play.

imachine1980_ 4y ago
That's not true most manufacters can change the machine yearly but try to change sap for oracle, or your custom solution for sap, and you are spending million of dollars in multi years projects, I'm not expecting free and cheap software to end , but having a game than breaks in 10 years isn't problematic, but pushing delicate software for no reason, that could break in 5 years, becouse is impossible to the customer to know the dependencies of the program, or how robust is under stress test and cybersecurity, means we lack engeniering discipline not economics reasons.
- pca006132 4y ago
  I think this is purely economic reasons, engineers working on that project is unlikely the people suggesting such a project...
- foul 4y ago
  Software is still easier and cheaper to change than what you'd spend for changing hardware, data and users. It's every time a multi-year project for big programs because of data and accustoming users for their habits and needs.
mikewarot 4y ago
>it can be done for free over the internet. The cost to manufacture an executable is effectively zero, so its easy to incorrectly assume that means there are no costs. The cost to integrate an executable is NEVER zero, there are always costs. Windows is far, FAR less reliable on Wednesday morning because of "Patch Tuesday", this is a substantial and real cost. The same is true for any system that implements "security patches" and feature "upgrades".

imachine1980_ 4y ago

That's not true most manufacters can change the machine yearly but try to change sap for oracle, or your custom solution for sap, and you are spending million of dollars in multi years projects, I'm not expecting free and cheap software to end , but having a game than breaks in 10 years isn't problematic, but pushing delicate software for no reason, that could break in 5 years, becouse is impossible to the customer to know the dependencies of the program, or how robust is under stress test and cybersecurity, means we lack engeniering discipline not economics reasons.

pca006132 4y ago
I think this is purely economic reasons, engineers working on that project is unlikely the people suggesting such a project...
foul 4y ago
Software is still easier and cheaper to change than what you'd spend for changing hardware, data and users. It's every time a multi-year project for big programs because of data and accustoming users for their habits and needs.

mikewarot 4y ago

>it can be done for free over the internet. The cost to manufacture an executable is effectively zero, so its easy to incorrectly assume that means there are no costs. The cost to integrate an executable is NEVER zero, there are always costs. Windows is far, FAR less reliable on Wednesday morning because of "Patch Tuesday", this is a substantial and real cost. The same is true for any system that implements "security patches" and feature "upgrades".