Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The obsession with next

37signals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 55 posts

Re: The obsession with next

#11

Post by blehn »

smikhanov wrote: post #5
blehn wrote: post #3

The thing about software development is that the technology (tools) changes faster than you can evolve a product. Integrating new technologies into an existing product can be a real challenge. If all you do is evolve, there inevitably comes a point where your product is behind the curve. Basecamp and Fogbugz are good products that were probably great at some point, but now they just seem old and crusty compared to pr…

There are lots of hottest web startups out there that use LAMP as their primary stack. Even more, first version of Mint.com was written (horror!) in Java. The technology stack has absolutely nothing to do with your ability to keep the pace with competition.

  first version of Mint.com was written (horror!) in Java
You're implying that it was entirely rewritten in something else later...

Re: The obsession with next

#13

Post by blehn »

nhangen wrote: post #7
blehn wrote: post #3

The thing about software development is that the technology (tools) changes faster than you can evolve a product. Integrating new technologies into an existing product can be a real challenge. If all you do is evolve, there inevitably comes a point where your product is behind the curve. Basecamp and Fogbugz are good products that were probably great at some point, but now they just seem old and crusty compared to pr…

It's hard to compare Asana, which still hasn't outgrown beta, to a product like Basecamp that has serviced millions of users. I agree that Basecamp feels a bit stale, but I don't think it's as much about technology as it is about their design and development philosophy.

That's fair. I suppose the real point is that it's easy for a product get stale, even if it's constantly evolving.

Re: The obsession with next

#14

Post by stuhacking »

blehn wrote: post #3

The thing about software development is that the technology (tools) changes faster than you can evolve a product. Integrating new technologies into an existing product can be a real challenge. If all you do is evolve, there inevitably comes a point where your product is behind the curve. Basecamp and Fogbugz are good products that were probably great at some point, but now they just seem old and crusty compared to pr…

or rethink and rebuild the product before it falls behind.

You mean like Netscape did?

oh, wait...

Re: The obsession with next

#15

Post by pragmatic »

Is it a tad odd that this comes from the RoR guys? Ruby + RoR in the mid to late 2000's was _the_ next language/framework.

So it's ok for next as long as _you_ benefit, but not if it causes you inconvenience.

Re: The obsession with next

#16

Post by icefox »

edw519 wrote: post #10

I dunno, 99% of the people I talk to (the rest of the world) is less worried about what new technology is next than when current technology will work right. What's next, according to them: - When will the website work for any browser? - When will the website talk to the fulfillment system? - When will I be able to log in with less than 14 passwords? - When will we be able to use our mouse on the Report Writer? - When…

You will never be able to stop spam (I assume you mean email). A few years ago I realized this when looking through my logs I saw emails to ... bob@domain.com ben@domain.com berry@domain.com ... etc Blindly trying the most common. I knew then that if I wanted the account name ben I could never 'solve' spam on top of our general email system we have today.

Re: The obsession with next

#17

Post by tertius »

pragmatic wrote: post #15

Is it a tad odd that this comes from the RoR guys? Ruby + RoR in the mid to late 2000's was _the_ next language/framework. So it's ok for next as long as _you_ benefit, but not if it causes you inconvenience.

Using the latest tools for the work that you're doing is great if the tools actually make your process better.

Adding new features, chasing empty trends that people don't want is quite different.

Re: The obsession with next

#18

Post by true_religion »

pragmatic wrote: post #15

Is it a tad odd that this comes from the RoR guys? Ruby + RoR in the mid to late 2000's was _the_ next language/framework. So it's ok for next as long as _you_ benefit, but not if it causes you inconvenience.

You're accusing them of mercurial morals, but did they ever previously promote the idea that "next" for the sake of "next" was a good thing?

Re: The obsession with next

#19

Post by zackham »

JonnieCache wrote: post #9
nhangen wrote: post #2

I think the obsession with next comes not because we're obsessed with new, but because we're excited about it! New technology, new ideas, new innovation - it's all happening at lightning speed. We're part of the greatest time in the history of the world IMO, and that's why we love next - we can't wait to see it. We're inventing fire, the wheel, and the printing press back to back. Whether we like it or not, next is t…

>We're part of the greatest time in the history of the world IMO That's quite a claim. Technology must be advancing fast if you already have Muad'Dib's ability to perceive all of human history simultaneously as one infinite structure extending in both directions. How did I miss Steve Jobs getting the Arrakis fiefdom? Or could it be that Now is always the greatest part of history because it's by definition the only pa…

There's a simple argument to be made that the events that are unfolding in the course of our lifetimes have resulted in an unprecedented degree of societal and technological progress than ever before in the history of the world.

You're offering a reasonable critique, but no alternative. I'd love to hear an argument for another period in history that might be a contender for being as or more "great".

Re: The obsession with next

#20

Post by mtalbot »

This is definitely a problem in our culture and the 'what's next' mentality can end up adding a lot of noise to innovation. New is exciting & fun for sure, but what's better for business and progress is something novel that is then flushed out over a relatively long term to become a successful business. Then the business is in a better place to make huge impact (see Apple...)
Post reply on HN