Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Ok boomer. :-P

Having lived through both, modern development practice is superior in practically every way, most especially with respect to quality.

The problem with Heavy Development Methodologies is that they didn't actually work.



Don't take this as an endorsement of BDUF practices and the like, they're as fraught as anything, but it's important to also recognize what modern development practices trend hard towards themselves: the trapping of oneself in a local maximum.

I have a blog post in the works about this but it's not ready to share; in short, I can't help but notice that hyper-focused, optimize-for-time-to-market, minimum-viable-product projects have a real, and frequently killer, problem once you have built your initial, hopefully-better mousetrap. Almost every company I've ever worked for has gotten that initial mousetrap done, tried to expand horizontally to actually have enough stuff-that-works-together to actually sell, and fallen on their faces because that initial super-specific development effort created not just code, but product assumptions that are prohibitive to unwind.

Most of them hit the hillside because reality is no longer playing ball with their (frequently VC-driven) needs to cut scope and ship.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: