Live data from Hacker News

Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

martinalderson.com

361–370 of 744 posts

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#361
post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claims about agentic workflows are the new version of "works on my machine" and should be treated with skepticism if they cannot be committed to a repository and used by other people. Maybe parent is a galaxy-brained genius, or.. maybe they are just leaving work early and creating a huge mess for coworkers who now must stay late. Hard to say. But someone who isn't interested in automating/encoding processes for their…

> And someone who isn't interested in sharing productivity gains with coworkers is basically engaged in sabotage. Who says they aren't interested in sharing? To give a less emotionally charged example: I think my specific use pattern of Git makes me (a bit) more productive. And I'm happy to chew anyone's ear off about it who's willing to listen. But the willingness and ability of my coworkers to engage in git-related…

Something that is advertised as 10x improvement in productivity isn't like your personal preferences for git or a few dinky bash aliases or whatever. It's more like a secret personal project test-suite, or a whole data pipeline you're keeping private while everyone else is laboriously doing things manually.

Assuming 10x is real, then again the question: why would anyone do that? The only answers I can come up with are that they cannot share it (incompetence) or that they don't want to (sabotage). You're saying the third option is.. people just like working 8 hours while this guy works 1? Seems unlikely. Even if that's not sabotaging coworkers it's still sabotaging the business

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#362
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should also get a flurry of low-cost, decent-quality native local-first software, but I’m not seeing any.

> Local-first > Not seeing any Working exactly as intended?

This. I have a massive amount of custom software running locally to solve all sorts of problems for me now.

But it's for me and tailor made to solve my precise use cases. Publishing it would just add headaches and endless feature requests and bug reports for zero benefit to me.

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#363
post #158

The cost of writing simple code has dropped 90%. If you can reduce a problem to a point where it can be solved by simple code you can get the rest of the solution very quickly. Reducing a problem to a point where it can be solved with simple code takes a lot of skill and experience and is generally still quite a time-consuming process.

Well said. The cost of building a CRUD has dropped 90%.

The open question is why people needed fancy AI tools like Claude to write CRUDs in the first place. These kind of tasks ought to be have been automated a long time ago.

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#364
post #35

Had the cost of building custom software dropped 90%, we would be seeing a flurry of low-cost, decent-quality SaaS offering all over the marketplace, possibly undercutting some established players. From where I sit, right now, this does not seem to be the case. This is as if writing down the code is not the biggest problem, or the biggest time sink, of building software.

Something weird happened to software after the 90s or so. You had all these small-by-modern-standards teams (though sometimes in large companies) putting out desktop applications, sometimes on multiple platforms, with shitloads of features. On fairly tight schedules. To address markets that are itty-bitty by modern standards. Now people are like “We’ll need (3x the personnel) and (2x the time) and you can forget abou…

Part of this is the huge ZIRP-driven salary bubble in the US. If good software engineers were as cheap as good structural engineers, you'd be able to stick three of them in a room for $500k a year and add a part-time manager and they'd churn out line-of-business software for some weird little niche that saves 50 skilled-employee-years per year and costs $20k a seat.

The bubble means that a) the salaries are higher, b) the total addressable market has to justify those salaries, c) everyone cargo cults the success stories, and so d) the best practices are all based on the idea that you're going to hyperscale and therefore need a bazillion microservices hooked up to multiple distributed databases that either use atomic clocks or are only eventually consistent, distributed queues and logs for everything, four separate UIs that work on web/iOS/android/desktop, an entire hadoop cluster, some kind of k8s/mesos/ECS abomination, etc.

The rest of the world, and apparently even the rest of the US, has engineering that looks a little more like this, but it's still influenced by hyperscaler best practices.

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#366
post #35

Had the cost of building custom software dropped 90%, we would be seeing a flurry of low-cost, decent-quality SaaS offering all over the marketplace, possibly undercutting some established players. From where I sit, right now, this does not seem to be the case. This is as if writing down the code is not the biggest problem, or the biggest time sink, of building software.

Astute observation. From where I sit, the market (at least for business software; I am not very familiar with the consumer market) seems to be wide open, and businesses in the 5 - 200 employee range seem to be particularly underserved.

The marketplace for software for single-owner shops or 1-5 employee size places does seem to be quite strong, and then there's enterprise software, but small business seems to have a software marketplace that is atrociously bad. Here is the typical thing a prospective customer asks me to fix for them:

- They are using some piece of software that is essential to their business. - There really isn't much good competition for that software, and it would be a large cost to convert to another platform that also has all the same downsides below. - The software vendor used to be great, but seems to have been sold several times. - The vendor has recently switched to a subscription-only model and keeps on raising subscription prices in the 12% or so range every year, and the cost of this has started to become noticeable in their budget. - They were accustomed to software being a capital investment with a modest ongoing cost for support, but now it's becoming just an expense. - Quality has taken a nosedive and in particular new features are buggy. Promised integrations seem quite lacking and new features/integrations feel bolted on. - Support is difficult to get ahold of, and the formerly good telephone support then got replaced by being asked to open tickets/emails and now has been replaced by an AI chatbot frontend before they can even open a ticket. Most issues go unresolved.

There are literally millions of software packages in existence, and the bulk of them by numbers are niche products used by small businesses. (Think of a software package which solely exists to help you write custom enhancements for another software package which is used by a specific sector of the furniture-manufacturing business, to get an example.) The quality of this sector is not improving.

This is a field that is absolutely ripe for improvement. If the cost of building software really were dropping 90%, this would be a very easy field to move into and simply start offering for $6,000 a year the product that your competition is charging $12,000 a year for, for an inferior product. Before you bring up things like vendor lock-in or the pain of migration... why can't you write software to solve those problems, too? After all, the cost of writing a migration tool should be 90% cheaper now, too, right?

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#367
post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And someone who isn't interested in sharing productivity gains with coworkers is basically engaged in sabotage. Who says they aren't interested in sharing? To give a less emotionally charged example: I think my specific use pattern of Git makes me (a bit) more productive. And I'm happy to chew anyone's ear off about it who's willing to listen. But the willingness and ability of my coworkers to engage in git-related…

Something that is advertised as 10x improvement in productivity isn't like your personal preferences for git or a few dinky bash aliases or whatever. It's more like a secret personal project test-suite, or a whole data pipeline you're keeping private while everyone else is laboriously doing things manually. Assuming 10x is real, then again the question: why would anyone do that? The only answers I can come up with ar…

The reason is because we are a Microsoft shop and our company doesn't have Claude account. I'm using my personal Claude Max account. My manager does know that I use Claude Code and I requested the person responsible for AI tooling in our company to use Claude Code but he just said that management already decided to go with GitHub copilot. He thinks that using Claude model in Copilot is same as using Claude Code. Another issue is that we are a Microsoft shop and I use Claude Code through WSL but I'm the only person on our team with Linux skills.

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#368
post #35

Had the cost of building custom software dropped 90%, we would be seeing a flurry of low-cost, decent-quality SaaS offering all over the marketplace, possibly undercutting some established players. From where I sit, right now, this does not seem to be the case. This is as if writing down the code is not the biggest problem, or the biggest time sink, of building software.

I found that the time (1-4 hours) is enough to build any SaaS for myself

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#369
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We were paying for Salesforce, then built the features we needed to do the same tracking into our interal tool and got rid of Salesforce to save money and simplify the data internally across departments

And now you have to spend money on developers for a system that “doesn’t make the beer taste better”. Does it give you a competitive advantage in the market?

If they saved money, as they said it did, then... yes?

Re: Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

#370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really curious on what your role is, and which industry are you in? I'm awed by these productivity gains others report, but I feel like AI helps in such a small part of my job (implementing specific changes as I direct). Agentic workflows for me results in bloated code, which is fine when I'm willing to hand over an subsystem to the agent, such as a frontend on a side project and have it vibe code the entire thin…

Claims about agentic workflows are the new version of "works on my machine" and should be treated with skepticism if they cannot be committed to a repository and used by other people. Maybe parent is a galaxy-brained genius, or.. maybe they are just leaving work early and creating a huge mess for coworkers who now must stay late. Hard to say. But someone who isn't interested in automating/encoding processes for their…

I'm teaching a course in how to do this to one of my clients this week.

Also, I used this same process to address a bug that is many years old in a very popular library this week. Admittedly, the first solution was a little wordy and required some back and forth, but I was able to get to a clean tested solution with little pain.

Post reply on HN