4 ms·

Pretty interesting that according to him, Airbnb didn't really have a functioning testing infrastructure only a year ago. So you really can hit a billion dollar

Pretty interesting that according to him, Airbnb didn't really have a functioning testing infrastructure only a year ago. So you really can hit a billion dollars in valuation without testing :)

logicallee 13y ago
or worse, you can only hit a billion dollars in valuation without testing. (might be a true statement.)
- hoverkraft 13y ago
  I disagree with this pretty strongly. Somebody posed a similar question in the blog comments, and I think I did a decent job of answering it: http://nerds.airbnb.com/testing-at-airbnb/#comment-13289 http://nerds.airbnb.com/testing-at-airbnb/#comment-13289
  - hoka 13y ago
    you did. Thanks for answering! I'm definitely the one leading the (small) group of devs who test here. Your article was great motivation for our cause.
TheRealWatson 13y ago
Despite of what developers like to think, success is not linked to technical competence. Achieving the former allows you to address the latter.
- habosa 13y ago
  This should be said on HN more often. No text editor, package manager, or library is going to make you a success.
  - simon_renoult 13y ago
    I didn't know HN was about success.
    - habosa 13y ago
      You're right it's not, but we talk about it a lot.
- argonaut 13y ago
  Or, more accurately, achieving the former allows you to hire 20 engineers to achieve the latter.
  - novaleaf 13y ago
    unless you are MtGox
- programminggeek 13y ago
  This is one reason I'm moving back to the LAMP stack. It's ugly, boring, and cheap. Great for prototyping.
  - girvo 13y ago
    It's a major reason I still use something similar, although I've been using HHVM instead. Amazing for prototyping, and years of experience makes it easy to work with personally :)
    - sireat 13y ago
      I assume you mean HipHop Virtual Machine?
      - girvo 13y ago
        Yep, running side by side with PHP 5.5! I highly suggest trying it, it's an awesome implementation.
TheRealWatson 13y ago
Despite of what developers like to think, success is not linked to technical competence. Achieving the former allows you to address the latter.
choonkeat 13y ago
A public service announcement: There’s still a lot of pretty good programmers who don’t write tests… and programmers who write tests are not necessarily any good - http://blog.choonkeat.com/weblog/2012/06/tdd-for-those-who-dont-need-it.html http://blog.choonkeat.com/weblog/2012/06/tdd-for-those-who-d...
nostrademons 13y ago
Google didn't really have a culture of testing until around 2005-2006. At that point they were public and had a $100B+ market cap. I'm sure there are other public companies out there who don't do automated testing at all. The technical infrastructure and code quality of a company are secondary factors in its success. The biggest influence they have is in the ability to attract and retain brilliant engineers, because most brilliant engineers don't want to work in a place where they're just treading water with bugfixes (which is the situation you eventually get into without automated testing). But the mechanism is that brilliant engineers write features that your competitors can't match, not that testing itself will make you successful.
- peterwwillis 13y ago
  What does a brilliant engineer have to do with success? You don't need a brilliant engineer to have a successful company. Some companies do lean heavily on their engineering department, while others simply have better direction and leadership to execute with. Google's success was largely focused around an engineering solution to a problem - giving people search results that are more relevant than before. But other companies like Uber aren't solving engineering problems, they're solving multi-dimensional problems without relying solely on brilliant engineers for success. Uber attempts to reduce friction in locating, requesting, and being updated on their transportation, reducing cost, and improving the quality of the service - all of which are not engineering-bound problems. Sure, being updated on the location on a map is a significant feature, but overlaying gps coordinates on a map does not require engineering genius. What does take considerable effort, though, are the varying logistics going into managing the drivers, the payment systems, the regulations, the customer service, etc that are the heart of the business. Their apps and mobile site (at least while i've been using it) have been unreliable or limited in terms of what would be the most useful capability for its users. It's not a stretch to say the technology involved in Uber has been weak compared to the great lengths they've gone in managing real-world resources to get their product to market. I'll take 5 regular engineers and 1 really good leader over 5 brilliant engineers any day.
  - nostrademons 13y ago

Pretty interesting that according to him, Airbnb didn't really have a functioning testing infrastructure only a year ago. So you really can hit a billion dollars in valuation without testing :)

logicallee 13y ago

or worse, you can only hit a billion dollars in valuation without testing. (might be a true statement.)

hoverkraft 13y ago
I disagree with this pretty strongly. Somebody posed a similar question in the blog comments, and I think I did a decent job of answering it: http://nerds.airbnb.com/testing-at-airbnb/#comment-13289 http://nerds.airbnb.com/testing-at-airbnb/#comment-13289
- hoka 13y ago
  you did. Thanks for answering! I'm definitely the one leading the (small) group of devs who test here. Your article was great motivation for our cause.

TheRealWatson 13y ago

Despite of what developers like to think, success is not linked to technical competence. Achieving the former allows you to address the latter.

habosa 13y ago
This should be said on HN more often. No text editor, package manager, or library is going to make you a success.
- simon_renoult 13y ago
  I didn't know HN was about success.
  - habosa 13y ago
    You're right it's not, but we talk about it a lot.
argonaut 13y ago
Or, more accurately, achieving the former allows you to hire 20 engineers to achieve the latter.
- novaleaf 13y ago
  unless you are MtGox
programminggeek 13y ago
This is one reason I'm moving back to the LAMP stack. It's ugly, boring, and cheap. Great for prototyping.
- girvo 13y ago
  It's a major reason I still use something similar, although I've been using HHVM instead. Amazing for prototyping, and years of experience makes it easy to work with personally :)
  - sireat 13y ago
    I assume you mean HipHop Virtual Machine?
    - girvo 13y ago
      Yep, running side by side with PHP 5.5! I highly suggest trying it, it's an awesome implementation.

TheRealWatson 13y ago

Despite of what developers like to think, success is not linked to technical competence. Achieving the former allows you to address the latter.

choonkeat 13y ago

A public service announcement: There’s still a lot of pretty good programmers who don’t write tests… and programmers who write tests are not necessarily any good - http://blog.choonkeat.com/weblog/2012/06/tdd-for-those-who-dont-need-it.html http://blog.choonkeat.com/weblog/2012/06/tdd-for-those-who-d...

nostrademons 13y ago

Google didn't really have a culture of testing until around 2005-2006. At that point they were public and had a $100B+ market cap. I'm sure there are other public companies out there who don't do automated testing at all. The technical infrastructure and code quality of a company are secondary factors in its success. The biggest influence they have is in the ability to attract and retain brilliant engineers, because most brilliant engineers don't want to work in a place where they're just treading water with bugfixes (which is the situation you eventually get into without automated testing). But the mechanism is that brilliant engineers write features that your competitors can't match, not that testing itself will make you successful.

peterwwillis 13y ago
What does a brilliant engineer have to do with success? You don't need a brilliant engineer to have a successful company. Some companies do lean heavily on their engineering department, while others simply have better direction and leadership to execute with. Google's success was largely focused around an engineering solution to a problem - giving people search results that are more relevant than before. But other companies like Uber aren't solving engineering problems, they're solving multi-dimensional problems without relying solely on brilliant engineers for success. Uber attempts to reduce friction in locating, requesting, and being updated on their transportation, reducing cost, and improving the quality of the service - all of which are not engineering-bound problems. Sure, being updated on the location on a map is a significant feature, but overlaying gps coordinates on a map does not require engineering genius. What does take considerable effort, though, are the varying logistics going into managing the drivers, the payment systems, the regulations, the customer service, etc that are the heart of the business. Their apps and mobile site (at least while i've been using it) have been unreliable or limited in terms of what would be the most useful capability for its users. It's not a stretch to say the technology involved in Uber has been weak compared to the great lengths they've gone in managing real-world resources to get their product to market. I'll take 5 regular engineers and 1 really good leader over 5 brilliant engineers any day.
- nostrademons 13y ago