3 ms·

Stop. Re-read the post. Try to understand the point of the post. Understand what it is he's saying about process, craftsmanship and trying to fix things that ar

Stop. Re-read the post. Try to understand the point of the post. Understand what it is he's saying about process, craftsmanship and trying to fix things that are broken instead of making excuses. Understand it as a call to action to do better, to be better and to care more. Then re-read your response and see what a defensive crouch you immediately took. How that immediate defensive reaction led you to miss these points. Crying "complexity!" for things that don't work is not a solution. Time, money, education and understanding are required to implement a solution, and I believe that Scott is explicitly calling for the latter and implicitly calling for the rest.

batista 14y ago
>Stop. Re-read the post. Try to understand the point of the post. Understand what it is he's saying about process, craftsmanship and trying to fix things that are broken instead of making excuses. Understand it as a call to action to do better, to be better and to care more. "Calls to action to do better" are a dime a dozen. You can get them in $5 self-help books, motivational posters and bs marketing gurus. For all I know, they come free with Cheetos. The problems he describes are not because of some "lack of craftmanship". They are inevitable in large scale, enormous complexity systems, that also have to SHIP some day. Things that CAN get fixed, ARE getting fixed. >Time, money, education and understanding are required to implement a solution, and I believe that Scott is explicitly calling for the latter and implicitly calling for the rest. Saying that "Time, money, education and understanding are required to implement a solution" means absolutely nothing. At best is a platitude that goes without saying. Do you or Scott thinks that the major software players do not spend time, money, education and understanding on what they are making? Microsoft, one of the software makers he complains about (and he knows internally), spends tons of money on testing and QA. And it has some of the top minds in software engineering. Ditto for Apple, ditto for Google.

batista 14y ago

>Stop. Re-read the post. Try to understand the point of the post. Understand what it is he's saying about process, craftsmanship and trying to fix things that are broken instead of making excuses. Understand it as a call to action to do better, to be better and to care more. "Calls to action to do better" are a dime a dozen. You can get them in $5 self-help books, motivational posters and bs marketing gurus. For all I know, they come free with Cheetos. The problems he describes are not because of some "lack of craftmanship". They are inevitable in large scale, enormous complexity systems, that also have to SHIP some day. Things that CAN get fixed, ARE getting fixed. >Time, money, education and understanding are required to implement a solution, and I believe that Scott is explicitly calling for the latter and implicitly calling for the rest. Saying that "Time, money, education and understanding are required to implement a solution" means absolutely nothing. At best is a platitude that goes without saying. Do you or Scott thinks that the major software players do not spend time, money, education and understanding on what they are making? Microsoft, one of the software makers he complains about (and he knows internally), spends tons of money on testing and QA. And it has some of the top minds in software engineering. Ditto for Apple, ditto for Google.