4 ms·

As always, it's a joy to read Martin Fowler. It's so, so hard to resist the siren song of premature optimization, though. It's even harder in a corporate envir

by beat 11y ago

As always, it's a joy to read Martin Fowler. It's so, so hard to resist the siren song of premature optimization, though. It's even harder in a corporate environment where "Well, why didn't you plan for that?" is a question lurking behind every failure or delay. Overplanning isn't punished.

mkozlows 11y ago
This is becoming less true over time. As enterprises start adopting Lean practices, it becomes obvious to everyone why building something now when you won't use it for months is waste.
- beat 11y ago
  If there's one thing enterprises don't give a flying fsck about, it's waste. After a couple decades of mostly-enterprise development, I've learned something really important - it's better to not be wrong than to be right. Thus the overbuilding and risk aversion. Frankly, this is the only real advantage startups have over the enterprise - the ability to take risk.
  - mgkimsal 11y ago
    "it's better to not be wrong than to be right" My limited experience in that world was that there often wasn't a really good way of identifying when something was in fact 'right', only that it wasn't broken (whenever it was reviewed/inspected). New info could always come along which would call in to question previous decisions, and new people would come in with different (or no) understanding of previous stages. Couple that with organizations in which everyone is free to say 'no' to things, or they're free to chime in with demands without having to actually commit resources for dev or support, and you get weird situations (I've got a few war stories, as I'm sure many people here do too).
briandear 11y ago
I disagree. If overbuilding or over planning is wrong. Then the question comes as to why you spent $200k building a feature that just got thrown out. Or worse, they try to use a unneeded feature just to justify the fact that it was built.
- beat 11y ago
  I didn't say it isn't wrong. I said it isn't punished. That's a very, very different thing. Enterprise environments encourage toxic behavior in numerous ways. This is one of them. Risk aversion is generally more important than cost control in the enterprise. Conway's Law in action, if you think about it.
- not_with_retard 11y ago
  Because if you didn't spend 200k then actually came to need it, you would have lost your 100 million dollar deal. It's a completely different beast, and making sure your ass is always covered is of utmost importance, which is why the largest companies are constantly doing it. On a much smaller scale, and hopefully one more relatable, this is why even smaller businesses always go with the software/hardware package which includes support. Cover your ass.
pbreit 11y ago
In startups, overplanning is punished by company failure.
- Silhouette 11y ago
  In startups, almost everything is punished by company failure. Another example is failing to plan ahead far enough that you can maintain your first mover advantage when a competitor comes along and already has the benefit of learning from your mistakes so far.

by beat 11y ago

mkozlows 11y ago

This is becoming less true over time. As enterprises start adopting Lean practices, it becomes obvious to everyone why building something now when you won't use it for months is waste.

beat 11y ago
If there's one thing enterprises don't give a flying fsck about, it's waste. After a couple decades of mostly-enterprise development, I've learned something really important - it's better to not be wrong than to be right. Thus the overbuilding and risk aversion. Frankly, this is the only real advantage startups have over the enterprise - the ability to take risk.
- mgkimsal 11y ago
  "it's better to not be wrong than to be right" My limited experience in that world was that there often wasn't a really good way of identifying when something was in fact 'right', only that it wasn't broken (whenever it was reviewed/inspected). New info could always come along which would call in to question previous decisions, and new people would come in with different (or no) understanding of previous stages. Couple that with organizations in which everyone is free to say 'no' to things, or they're free to chime in with demands without having to actually commit resources for dev or support, and you get weird situations (I've got a few war stories, as I'm sure many people here do too).

briandear 11y ago

I disagree. If overbuilding or over planning is wrong. Then the question comes as to why you spent $200k building a feature that just got thrown out. Or worse, they try to use a unneeded feature just to justify the fact that it was built.

beat 11y ago
I didn't say it isn't wrong. I said it isn't punished. That's a very, very different thing. Enterprise environments encourage toxic behavior in numerous ways. This is one of them. Risk aversion is generally more important than cost control in the enterprise. Conway's Law in action, if you think about it.
not_with_retard 11y ago
Because if you didn't spend 200k then actually came to need it, you would have lost your 100 million dollar deal. It's a completely different beast, and making sure your ass is always covered is of utmost importance, which is why the largest companies are constantly doing it. On a much smaller scale, and hopefully one more relatable, this is why even smaller businesses always go with the software/hardware package which includes support. Cover your ass.

pbreit 11y ago

In startups, overplanning is punished by company failure.

Silhouette 11y ago
In startups, almost everything is punished by company failure. Another example is failing to plan ahead far enough that you can maintain your first mover advantage when a competitor comes along and already has the benefit of learning from your mistakes so far.