5 ms·

Hmm so it only takes a few days to "completely overhaul" their developer systems? Not sure I believe this is what they're actually doing. And why haven't they u

by pdknsk 13y ago

Hmm so it only takes a few days to "completely overhaul" their developer systems? Not sure I believe this is what they're actually doing. And why haven't they updated their server software before? I know mistakes can never be completely avoided, but this seems slightly amateurish for a company with so much cash.

k-mcgrady 13y ago
>> "Hmm so it only takes a few days to "completely overhaul" their developer systems?" They've already been down a few days and haven't said when they'll be back up so it's impossible to know yet how long it'll take.
objclxt 13y ago
> this seems slightly amateurish for a company with so much cash I know there are people here who probably have been in the start-up space for all of their working life, but never underestimate how piss poor architecture can be at big companies. I would place a large amount of money that every single person here who has done a stint at a large corporation has a horror story about terrible, awful architecture, outdated practices, and shoddy insecure software. And yes, that includes companies like Facebook, Google, etc.
- peterkelly 13y ago
  Case in point: http://bugreporter.apple.com http://bugreporter.apple.com still reflects the UI style of OS X 10.0
- stock_toaster 13y ago
  > I know there are people here who probably have been in the start-up space for all of their working life, but never underestimate how piss poor architecture can be at big companies. Systems that are over 5/10/etc years old and are part of a multi-million/billion dollar system even more so. > who has done a stint at a large corporation has a horror story about terrible, awful architecture, outdated practices, and shoddy insecure software. My god that rings so true. ;_;
_delirium 13y ago
There was some discussion in previous threads about how their systems seem (like many others, to be fair) to be a taped-together mess of old perl scripts and server-side includes and CMSs and who knows what else. So they're probably trying to come back online with a cut-down version that presents a smaller attack surface and contains only components that have been vetted in the last 10 years, which is overall not a bad idea.
- toyg 13y ago
  >a cut-down version that presents a smaller attack surface ... or simply a cut-down version they know how to run. "Mhh, what did that old cron job do, again?" "I don't know; it was written by Mike, he left 3 years ago." "oh ok, so not important then." <12 hours later> "OMG OUR DB EXPLODED AGAIN! That script was clearly essential! Can you rewrite it??" "Er, I've looked at it: 2000 LOC of obscure Perl. Gonna take a while..."
- threeseed 13y ago
  I've worked on some of those systems. This isn't true. Most of their web apps are WebObjects/Java apps. Sure some of them would be classed as legacy but it is hardly different from most other enterprise companies. And their systems are completely separate from each other e.g. iTunes, Apple Online Store, ID auth, Developer Portal.

by pdknsk 13y ago

k-mcgrady 13y ago

>> "Hmm so it only takes a few days to "completely overhaul" their developer systems?" They've already been down a few days and haven't said when they'll be back up so it's impossible to know yet how long it'll take.

objclxt 13y ago

> this seems slightly amateurish for a company with so much cash I know there are people here who probably have been in the start-up space for all of their working life, but never underestimate how piss poor architecture can be at big companies. I would place a large amount of money that every single person here who has done a stint at a large corporation has a horror story about terrible, awful architecture, outdated practices, and shoddy insecure software. And yes, that includes companies like Facebook, Google, etc.

peterkelly 13y ago
Case in point: http://bugreporter.apple.com http://bugreporter.apple.com still reflects the UI style of OS X 10.0
stock_toaster 13y ago
> I know there are people here who probably have been in the start-up space for all of their working life, but never underestimate how piss poor architecture can be at big companies. Systems that are over 5/10/etc years old and are part of a multi-million/billion dollar system even more so. > who has done a stint at a large corporation has a horror story about terrible, awful architecture, outdated practices, and shoddy insecure software. My god that rings so true. ;_;

_delirium 13y ago

There was some discussion in previous threads about how their systems seem (like many others, to be fair) to be a taped-together mess of old perl scripts and server-side includes and CMSs and who knows what else. So they're probably trying to come back online with a cut-down version that presents a smaller attack surface and contains only components that have been vetted in the last 10 years, which is overall not a bad idea.

toyg 13y ago
>a cut-down version that presents a smaller attack surface ... or simply a cut-down version they know how to run. "Mhh, what did that old cron job do, again?" "I don't know; it was written by Mike, he left 3 years ago." "oh ok, so not important then." <12 hours later> "OMG OUR DB EXPLODED AGAIN! That script was clearly essential! Can you rewrite it??" "Er, I've looked at it: 2000 LOC of obscure Perl. Gonna take a while..."
threeseed 13y ago
I've worked on some of those systems. This isn't true. Most of their web apps are WebObjects/Java apps. Sure some of them would be classed as legacy but it is hardly different from most other enterprise companies. And their systems are completely separate from each other e.g. iTunes, Apple Online Store, ID auth, Developer Portal.