4 ms·

Did you read the list of things I posted they have to do to ship their product? It's non trivial because those are hard problems and their space is large. It sh

by hungie 2y ago

Did you read the list of things I posted they have to do to ship their product? It's non trivial because those are hard problems and their space is large. It should be that complex because it is that complex.

mbrumlow 2y ago
No. I did not read your comment until now. Not sure how I replied to it. But anyways much of what you are listing is just more stuff that sounds complex or is not needed. It exist because there was money and it was a big bloated organization. It’s not needed to run the core business and frankly the cost of those things are still small. The number of users don’t change their engineering cost, or at least should not. The promise of software is exactly the return on investment is not affected by the number of people who use it. Also. You got me at dynamic content, that is the job of the software, not a human. If they have yet to provide user friendly interfaces down their editors to manipulate the content on their site without the need to interface with an engineer then they have already failed. I know this sounds like a rant, and maybe it is. But I am tried of poorly ran companies justifying outrageous team sizes because they simply ignore any good design with their software and how to organize a company to be lean agile and successful.
- Jcampuzano2 2y ago
  So is what you're arguing really that because its complex it shouldn't be done? So Netflix should never have been developed, because it wasn't needed and is very complex to run. You could already get videos at your local video store anyway. And how are you deciding what is or is not needed. You're basically saying the company should never innovate or try anything new outside of their existing core business, and should minimize their chances for monetization in new verticals which basically no corporation would ever do. They're always looking for other sources of monetization since thats what investors want.
  - mbrumlow 2y ago
    No. I am arguing it’s complex because of bad design decisions both in the software and business organization. Everything they do today could be done with under 100 engineers, maybe less.
Ferret7446 2y ago
Is it? A lot of small startups seem to be able to do 80% of that list just fine. As bad as the modern web is, if you think embedding media is a hard problem, one of us has clearly gone bat crazy. (To be clear, I welcome being told why embedding media is a really hard problem, but my experience hosting a self-implemented blog says otherwise.)
- hungie 2y ago
  The New York Times has a bunch of media visualizations that are often quite dynamic. Building those requires engineering and ux time. Then, ensuring they play well with their custom page layouts takes time. I'm not talking about embedding video, I'm talking about custom built JavaScript data visualization elements.

by hungie 2y ago

mbrumlow 2y ago

No. I did not read your comment until now. Not sure how I replied to it. But anyways much of what you are listing is just more stuff that sounds complex or is not needed. It exist because there was money and it was a big bloated organization. It’s not needed to run the core business and frankly the cost of those things are still small. The number of users don’t change their engineering cost, or at least should not. The promise of software is exactly the return on investment is not affected by the number of people who use it. Also. You got me at dynamic content, that is the job of the software, not a human. If they have yet to provide user friendly interfaces down their editors to manipulate the content on their site without the need to interface with an engineer then they have already failed. I know this sounds like a rant, and maybe it is. But I am tried of poorly ran companies justifying outrageous team sizes because they simply ignore any good design with their software and how to organize a company to be lean agile and successful.

Jcampuzano2 2y ago
So is what you're arguing really that because its complex it shouldn't be done? So Netflix should never have been developed, because it wasn't needed and is very complex to run. You could already get videos at your local video store anyway. And how are you deciding what is or is not needed. You're basically saying the company should never innovate or try anything new outside of their existing core business, and should minimize their chances for monetization in new verticals which basically no corporation would ever do. They're always looking for other sources of monetization since thats what investors want.
- mbrumlow 2y ago
  No. I am arguing it’s complex because of bad design decisions both in the software and business organization. Everything they do today could be done with under 100 engineers, maybe less.

Ferret7446 2y ago

Is it? A lot of small startups seem to be able to do 80% of that list just fine. As bad as the modern web is, if you think embedding media is a hard problem, one of us has clearly gone bat crazy. (To be clear, I welcome being told why embedding media is a really hard problem, but my experience hosting a self-implemented blog says otherwise.)

hungie 2y ago
The New York Times has a bunch of media visualizations that are often quite dynamic. Building those requires engineering and ux time. Then, ensuring they play well with their custom page layouts takes time. I'm not talking about embedding video, I'm talking about custom built JavaScript data visualization elements.