3 ms·

>If you want to work in software, try to go for companies whose main product is software. I used to think this before I worked at a software company. The prob

by tsotha 11y ago

>If you want to work in software, try to go for companies whose main product is software. I used to think this before I worked at a software company. The problem is software companies have far more time pressure, particularly small and medium sized companies. "We'll go out of business if we miss this deadline" doesn't result in high quality code. The best code I've seen was written for a telecom. The company had the resources and the patience to do it right, and (more importantly) the people in charge knew what they were doing.

lmg643 11y ago
I agree. A large business that uses software for a core revenue-producing source, is capable of doing fantastic work on that source. A software company providing that same product as a vendor, would be unlikely to have the motivation and focus to do it the same way. Key for me, is the principal/agent distinction. If you are using something as principal, for revenue, your motivations are very strong. If you are producing it as agent, for someone else's revenue, trickier. By definition, less money for you to get it right as agent for someone else. That said, there may be dozens to hundreds of ancillary software processes at a large business which are done very poorly, but any smart business of size will take great care of where the money comes from.
lewisl9029 11y ago
I'd think the problem you're seeing has more to do with the size and available resources of the company rather than the sector it operates in. Any company in its early stage growth period has to prioritize time to market over most other priorities, but this is true for startups in all sectors and not limited to software. Comparing an established telecom with a predictable revenue stream versus a software startup doesn't exactly make for a fair comparison. If you instead keep the size and available resources at least somewhat consistent, and look at software written for say a large telecom vs a large software company, or say a software startup vs a hardware startup, for instance, I think the tendencies I outlined in the original post will still hold in an overwhelming majority of cases.

by tsotha 11y ago

lmg643 11y ago

I agree. A large business that uses software for a core revenue-producing source, is capable of doing fantastic work on that source. A software company providing that same product as a vendor, would be unlikely to have the motivation and focus to do it the same way. Key for me, is the principal/agent distinction. If you are using something as principal, for revenue, your motivations are very strong. If you are producing it as agent, for someone else's revenue, trickier. By definition, less money for you to get it right as agent for someone else. That said, there may be dozens to hundreds of ancillary software processes at a large business which are done very poorly, but any smart business of size will take great care of where the money comes from.

lewisl9029 11y ago

I'd think the problem you're seeing has more to do with the size and available resources of the company rather than the sector it operates in. Any company in its early stage growth period has to prioritize time to market over most other priorities, but this is true for startups in all sectors and not limited to software. Comparing an established telecom with a predictable revenue stream versus a software startup doesn't exactly make for a fair comparison. If you instead keep the size and available resources at least somewhat consistent, and look at software written for say a large telecom vs a large software company, or say a software startup vs a hardware startup, for instance, I think the tendencies I outlined in the original post will still hold in an overwhelming majority of cases.