3 ms·
There is a balance to Not In House syndrome where you build everything yourself, and the opposite: everything should be vendored in. I am inclined to think that
by ecshafer 3y ago
There is a balance to Not In House syndrome where you build everything yourself, and the opposite: everything should be vendored in. I am inclined to think that a healthy NIH syndrome is the better place to be. Companies which vendor everything move along at a snails pace, and often getting your outside product to work with internal needs is a huge years long endeavor, to the point just writing a decent version yourself that is exactly what you need is really useful.
- marginalia_nu 3y agoNIH has shifted in meaning over time. It used to literally mean Not Invented Here. In the original sense, the NIH approach would be to invent a rivalling technique to the message broker. That is indeed a questionable idea.
- ecshafer 3y agoI think I just got it wrong. Not invented here sounds better and more right. I just typically think of only the acronym, and decided to write it out in case someone hadn’t heard it (and thus made a mistake). Good catch.
- marginalia_nu 3y agoThere's a bunch of alternative meanings that have cropped up to suit the new and wider meaning (which is definitely common). Seen Not Implemented Here too.
- throwaway2037 3y agoIn my experience, the problem with vendor: What if a feature is missing? I see this often when I am forced to use a vendor product. And, on day one, no one (hands on) usually knows anything about the vendor product, so there is a huge learning curve. If you follow NIH, then you organically build knowledge in the org. And features can be added with time+money. (Sure, some vendor products will add features, but usually for an insane price tag.) You cannot win either way: They hardest part is knowing which one to choose.