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

The Enterprise Experience

churchofturing.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 158 posts

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#51

Post by poslathian »

claw-el wrote: post #35
3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #28

Missing - new leadership will push out the old guard and replace them with friends - groups get renamed for the Nth time in N years. People continue to do the same job, but now the department has an additional "Innovation", "Discovery", or "Leadership" inserted into the title

> - groups get renamed for the Nth time in N years. People continue to do the same job, but now the department has an additional "Innovation", "Discovery", or "Leadership" inserted into the title Sometimes, I wish we name the team ‘Pikachu’ and continue on working. This way, others would know the name does not really matter, so they would stop changing the name. The amount of work to change the documentation and lets…

This comment gives me mixed feelings and some nostalgia for when our company was < 100 people and one of the core software teams was called “meow” - today we call it human robot interaction.

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#52

Post by 3eb7988a1663 »

vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #44
3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #28

Missing - new leadership will push out the old guard and replace them with friends - groups get renamed for the Nth time in N years. People continue to do the same job, but now the department has an additional "Innovation", "Discovery", or "Leadership" inserted into the title

Whenever I see or an initiative have "Excellence" in its name I know it's BS

"Excellence" was a huge miss on my part!

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#53

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

stackskipton wrote: post #49
nikcub wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if a piece of software is in any way described as being “enterprise”, it’s a piece of garbage. if safety standards are written in blood then enterprise software is written in lawsuits

Disagree that it's written in lawsuits, it's written to please every customer under the sun and due to this, code base has become Rube Goldberg machine that few people understand.

> it's written to please every customer under the sun

Yes, with the caveat that the customer is not - nor does not represent - the actual end-users. The customer is someone in procurement.

...or nepotism is involved.

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#54

Post by davnicwil »

kimixa wrote: post #21
9dev wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do this in a startup. Mostly when we have an ongoing conversation and it gets too tedious to explain something elaborate in text, when we could just talk it over and maybe share the screen or look at something together. I get the text-based communication preference, but I’ll stand by calls being far more efficient sometimes.

I generally like text even if it might take slightly longer to communicate, as it can then be referred back to later easily, and often the mental effort and time required to put it into words in the first place often means you have a clearer mental model of what you're trying to convey in the first place.

One thing I've seen work well is to write up the conclusions of the call, then ask the other person or people in it to review/edit.

That way, you get the benefits of higher bandwidth on the back and forth getting to those conclusions and then still get most or all of the benefits of written communication that you mention.

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#55

Post by Aeolun »

Yeah, point for point this sounds like exactly the enteprise I find myself in.

I think the difference is that different engineering team empires always push us to use their stuff, which then inevitably ends up being garbage.

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#56

Post by koolba »

vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #44
3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #28

Missing - new leadership will push out the old guard and replace them with friends - groups get renamed for the Nth time in N years. People continue to do the same job, but now the department has an additional "Innovation", "Discovery", or "Leadership" inserted into the title

Whenever I see or an initiative have "Excellence" in its name I know it's BS

Cross functional excellence is an important KPI when you want to expand your market leading synergies.

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#57

Post by Aeolun »

BrenBarn wrote: post #23

Always worth keeping in mind Remy's Law of Enterprise Software ( https://thedailywtf.com/articles/graceful-depredations ): if a piece of software is in any way described as being “enterprise”, it’s a piece of garbage. Joking aside, I was intrigued by the list of good things at the end of the post. Some I could understand, but some seemed to fall into that strange category of things that people say are good but really…

I don’t think enterprise software is by definition bad. You can absolutely make good enterprise software, but doing that while adhering to the morass of requirements is a skill unto itself.

And something that most people in an enterprise are just not all that interested in, since they’re never judged on how pleasant the software they deliver is to use.

Hell, they not ever see any of the users interacting with the software. I’ve been at $ENTERPRISE for 7 years, and I’ve visited our users exactly once.

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#58

Post by Aeolun »

makeitdouble wrote: post #45
BrenBarn wrote: post #23

Always worth keeping in mind Remy's Law of Enterprise Software ( https://thedailywtf.com/articles/graceful-depredations ): if a piece of software is in any way described as being “enterprise”, it’s a piece of garbage. Joking aside, I was intrigued by the list of good things at the end of the post. Some I could understand, but some seemed to fall into that strange category of things that people say are good but really…

> Does "career development" just mean "more money"? If you want to become a researcher in data science or developper evangelist for instance, you'll need a org that can sustain your work. Or if you want to be a micro service architect, you'll be booed in a 3 people shop but heartfully welcomed in 3000 people companies. Same for engineering manager paths, it only makes sense if you have the headcount. > software is ba…

> heartfully welcomed in 3000 people companies

Unfortunately, because most of those 3000 will think about the fact their org is 3000 people. Not that the user base for the new product is 5 people using it only on the weekend.

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#59

Post by linkage »

3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #28

Missing - new leadership will push out the old guard and replace them with friends - groups get renamed for the Nth time in N years. People continue to do the same job, but now the department has an additional "Innovation", "Discovery", or "Leadership" inserted into the title

We have an internal infrastructure-as-code library built on Terraform CDK that automatically provisions monitoring resources in Datadog and Pagerduty. One day, I simply removed a required argument named 'team', realizing that it has a half life of 7 months.

Re: The Enterprise Experience

#60

Post by Aeolun »

jiggawatts wrote: post #47
BrenBarn wrote: post #23

Always worth keeping in mind Remy's Law of Enterprise Software ( https://thedailywtf.com/articles/graceful-depredations ): if a piece of software is in any way described as being “enterprise”, it’s a piece of garbage. Joking aside, I was intrigued by the list of good things at the end of the post. Some I could understand, but some seemed to fall into that strange category of things that people say are good but really…

> ... Remy's Law of Enterprise Software ... the list of good things at the end of the post. Like the poster of the blog article, I too have worked in very large enterprise. Think 200K staff, 10K distinct servers, etc... I had the lucky opportunity to assist the CTO in hundred-million-dollar enterprise software purchasing decisions. I got to interview vendor after vendor, grilling them to see if they're compatible wit…

> For example, I didn't understand why Active Directory uses search dialog boxes for every "picker" GUI control instead of a simpler drop-down or something similar... until I worked in an environment with 2 million objects in the directory.

And that’s when you realize that searching in AD is actually dog slow, and you are better off just syncing the whole thing to a proper database, then checking if the object still exists after.

Seriously, why does a search that takes 1ms in postgres take 3 full seconds in AD?

Post reply on HN