> Huh, the author feels the pain with endless crappy and slow software.
If that was all, it would've been fine... if he was only listing bugs and saying he's tired of crappy software. But he has framed the article in a way as if he's describing the "why" and how the problem can be solved. In fact I've been following the author and he has a place where he lists all bugs he finds in software, and that in my opinion is a great initiative, but this article just opens too many threads and tangents and only appears to explain the root cause.
I could come up with a few examples like:
- trying to compare cars, buildings, and planes with software and not diving deeper into how much different they are and why.
- or saying everybody seems to be ok with inefficient software without diving deeper into why everyone's ok with it.
- or mentioning a tweet about a guy who spent more time trying to make something faster than he will ever gain back without going further into if it's a good/bad thing and why.
> If you feel all his points either superficial or wrong you could easily come up with counter arguments better than author.
I never said his points were superficial or wrong, just that he does not deeply engage with the threads he opens up. For that reason, I have no counter arguments to come up with, since he is just complaining about his issues and also does not come up with a good solution as such. Of course everyone would like nicer software, that's not new. Why is software different than other industries in the first place? Is it worth improving it? What are the trade-offs? What is the effort required at scale? What would we lose if we made software more like manufacturing? What would we gain? If he knows a path forward, does he have a better way to express it than the last "manifesto" paragraph? Etc.
If that was all, it would've been fine... if he was only listing bugs and saying he's tired of crappy software. But he has framed the article in a way as if he's describing the "why" and how the problem can be solved. In fact I've been following the author and he has a place where he lists all bugs he finds in software, and that in my opinion is a great initiative, but this article just opens too many threads and tangents and only appears to explain the root cause.
I could come up with a few examples like:
- trying to compare cars, buildings, and planes with software and not diving deeper into how much different they are and why. - or saying everybody seems to be ok with inefficient software without diving deeper into why everyone's ok with it. - or mentioning a tweet about a guy who spent more time trying to make something faster than he will ever gain back without going further into if it's a good/bad thing and why.
> If you feel all his points either superficial or wrong you could easily come up with counter arguments better than author.
I never said his points were superficial or wrong, just that he does not deeply engage with the threads he opens up. For that reason, I have no counter arguments to come up with, since he is just complaining about his issues and also does not come up with a good solution as such. Of course everyone would like nicer software, that's not new. Why is software different than other industries in the first place? Is it worth improving it? What are the trade-offs? What is the effort required at scale? What would we lose if we made software more like manufacturing? What would we gain? If he knows a path forward, does he have a better way to express it than the last "manifesto" paragraph? Etc.