The attack on Martin Fowler is unfair and unnecessary. Fowler became well known because he did a good job at writing and summarizing topics that were interestin

The attack on Martin Fowler is unfair and unnecessary. Fowler became well known because he did a good job at writing and summarizing topics that were interesting for people working with enterprise software a while ago (UML, Refactoring, Enterprise Architecture Patterns). If you read those books without critical thinking and follow them as a recipe, then the problem is not the book's author. I attribute software quality decline to increasing complexity and pressure to deliver faster, confirmation bias (what is the software that we are talking about? Looking back at the time of MS-DOS and Windows 3.1, I cannot say that software at that time had more quality), and finally a lost of interest of going “deep” in many areas (I agree with the author on this). Countless times, I talked with engineers in software architecture positions who base their decisions on the latest blog/article that they have read, without too much analysis. But, it doesn't matter if it's Fowler or another author.