2 ms·
Fair point. However, as someone who has (professionally) jumped from many different projects, on completely different platforms, I can attest to the fact that
by ermterm 11y ago
Fair point. However, as someone who has (professionally) jumped from many different projects, on completely different platforms, I can attest to the fact that it is often quicker to pick up a system, than to develop it from scratch. That would certainly be the case here.
Of course the code might not match their quality expectation, nor feature set, but the sell price would reflect that (I would assume).
Perhaps I'm trying too hard to argue for something, that just doesn't exist :)?
Oh, and I personally don't agree much with the "don't re-invent the wheel" adage. In software, re-inventing the wheel has made many people, many riches.
- michaelpinto 11y agoI've been working with coders for over 20+ years and yes there are exceptions but on the whole they're a picky lot. And even if they want to re-use code they tend to want something finished that's been well documented and field tested. Also the ones who re-invent the wheel and make money are the ones who have a design concept that is different, so just re-writng code for its own sake is a hobby. If you want examples from the field Bill Gates purchased what would become MS-DOS. Or another example might be Steve Jobs basing NeXT on an open version of Unix rather than re-writing an OS from scratch. But I think the key missing thing is having a finished product. This isn't to say that you can't ship with bugs (think of any Bill gates release) or ship with missing features (think of the MVP model) but ya gotta ship.