6 ms·

Thoughtworks Technology Radar Oct 2024 – From Coding Assistance to AI Evolution

42 points by NomDePlum 2y ago

vr46 2y ago
Ah, their fabled rear-view mirror again. A nicely-presented summary of various tech applications but I’m not sure we need a lighthouse anymore.
- fredgrott 2y ago
  fun fact, lighthouses were repurposed into coast guard rescue stations...at least on the Great Lakes that is the case...
  - vr46 2y ago
    That seems like an apt metaphor for TW, if the guards were the ones who got you into the mess in the first place, of course
- meiraleal 2y ago
  It is actually interesting how they miss most of them even "forecasting" after the fact by giving too much importance to things that flop later. GraphQL for data products ...
  - threecheese 2y ago
    Reading a little deeper, they seem to see that graphql’s ability to aggregate data products and their schemas is useful as support in LLM applications. The key term is “data products”; they don’t seem to be hyping it as the magical enterprise cross-system federated API gateway, instead as a structured/LLM-ingestible DSL for data understanding and live retrieval across many datasources. Which makes sense IMO.
  - vr46 2y ago
    Yes, feedback loops? What feedback loops!
smokel 2y ago
I love this initiative. We thought it would be a great idea to have a radar specifically for our own internal projects. Turns out that many companies are doing this already! ThoughtWorks even provides open-source tooling to help you set this up. For our second iteration we rewrote the entire radar frontend to better suit our needs. Using ChatGPT, Cursor, and Copilot, this was a breeze. [1] https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar/byor https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar/byor
dleeftink 2y ago
I appreciate the effort that has gone into organising the tech radars, each time. But whether by export group or review panel, I've come to belief that (blindly) following 'best practices' or 'industry standards' based on prospective adoption is moot. Tools, languages and technology take their place after a significant share of people have adopted them, not before. Trying to steer industry towards certain tools and away from others, ignores the irrational choices that belie them, and how resistant we may sometimes be to purported technical fixes. We are creatures of habit, and will break those habits on occasion, but ideally not because of an imbibed fear of losing out---the tools need to be proven in practice, not on promise.
- rpcope1 2y ago
  I agree. It is nice to see what others are using though (I hadn't heard of a lot of stuff they list), and see if there's anything that might be useful to investigate.
  - dleeftink 2y ago
    Word-of-mouth is key here I think, rather than one entity placing itself as a single source of truth. I think the unfortunate side-effect of these and similar tech retrospectives, is that they deepen a certain top-down view of technology; that new innovations fit neatly into pre-established categories of accept/reject, whereas reality is far less clear-cut and organisable in neat quadrants. To me, an immediate improvement would be to display user issues and workarounds along the newly reported technologies. Or why someone tried it and then left if on the shelf. Possibly in context of a multi-team project. Not a full write-up is needed here, but some practical user stories and anecdata alongside the current summary/ranking on the adoption radar would go a long way.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  You miss the purpose, this is for consulting companies, what to push, what to sell, what conferences to organise, which books to sponsor, what pitch to give at new customers, what to upsell,....
flowingfocus 2y ago
Link to the radar: https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar
- saikatsg 2y ago
  English PDF Link: https://www.thoughtworks.com/content/dam/thoughtworks/documents/radar/2024/10/tr_technology_radar_vol_31_en.pdf https://www.thoughtworks.com/content/dam/thoughtworks/docume...
deterministic 2y ago
Am I the only one who doesn't find this useful at all? It is very much the opposite of keep-it-simple and use-what-is-proven.
- normie3000 2y ago
  > Am I the only one who doesn't find this useful at all? I was going to say you're not alone, but for the purposes of identifying "what-is-proven" you can use the report to discount anything not labeled "adopt" as a starter.

42 points by NomDePlum 2y ago

vr46 2y ago

Ah, their fabled rear-view mirror again. A nicely-presented summary of various tech applications but I’m not sure we need a lighthouse anymore.

fredgrott 2y ago
fun fact, lighthouses were repurposed into coast guard rescue stations...at least on the Great Lakes that is the case...
- vr46 2y ago
  That seems like an apt metaphor for TW, if the guards were the ones who got you into the mess in the first place, of course
meiraleal 2y ago
It is actually interesting how they miss most of them even "forecasting" after the fact by giving too much importance to things that flop later. GraphQL for data products ...
- threecheese 2y ago
  Reading a little deeper, they seem to see that graphql’s ability to aggregate data products and their schemas is useful as support in LLM applications. The key term is “data products”; they don’t seem to be hyping it as the magical enterprise cross-system federated API gateway, instead as a structured/LLM-ingestible DSL for data understanding and live retrieval across many datasources. Which makes sense IMO.
- vr46 2y ago
  Yes, feedback loops? What feedback loops!

smokel 2y ago

I love this initiative. We thought it would be a great idea to have a radar specifically for our own internal projects. Turns out that many companies are doing this already! ThoughtWorks even provides open-source tooling to help you set this up. For our second iteration we rewrote the entire radar frontend to better suit our needs. Using ChatGPT, Cursor, and Copilot, this was a breeze. [1] https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar/byor https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar/byor

dleeftink 2y ago

I appreciate the effort that has gone into organising the tech radars, each time. But whether by export group or review panel, I've come to belief that (blindly) following 'best practices' or 'industry standards' based on prospective adoption is moot. Tools, languages and technology take their place after a significant share of people have adopted them, not before. Trying to steer industry towards certain tools and away from others, ignores the irrational choices that belie them, and how resistant we may sometimes be to purported technical fixes. We are creatures of habit, and will break those habits on occasion, but ideally not because of an imbibed fear of losing out---the tools need to be proven in practice, not on promise.

rpcope1 2y ago
I agree. It is nice to see what others are using though (I hadn't heard of a lot of stuff they list), and see if there's anything that might be useful to investigate.
- dleeftink 2y ago
  Word-of-mouth is key here I think, rather than one entity placing itself as a single source of truth. I think the unfortunate side-effect of these and similar tech retrospectives, is that they deepen a certain top-down view of technology; that new innovations fit neatly into pre-established categories of accept/reject, whereas reality is far less clear-cut and organisable in neat quadrants. To me, an immediate improvement would be to display user issues and workarounds along the newly reported technologies. Or why someone tried it and then left if on the shelf. Possibly in context of a multi-team project. Not a full write-up is needed here, but some practical user stories and anecdata alongside the current summary/ranking on the adoption radar would go a long way.
pjmlp 2y ago
You miss the purpose, this is for consulting companies, what to push, what to sell, what conferences to organise, which books to sponsor, what pitch to give at new customers, what to upsell,....

flowingfocus 2y ago

Link to the radar: https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar

saikatsg 2y ago
English PDF Link: https://www.thoughtworks.com/content/dam/thoughtworks/documents/radar/2024/10/tr_technology_radar_vol_31_en.pdf https://www.thoughtworks.com/content/dam/thoughtworks/docume...

deterministic 2y ago

Am I the only one who doesn't find this useful at all? It is very much the opposite of keep-it-simple and use-what-is-proven.

normie3000 2y ago
> Am I the only one who doesn't find this useful at all? I was going to say you're not alone, but for the purposes of identifying "what-is-proven" you can use the report to discount anything not labeled "adopt" as a starter.