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

Good software knows when to stop

ogirardot.writizzy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 304 posts

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#141

Post by JackSlateur »

john_strinlai wrote: post #132
JackSlateur wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the underlying problem is that newer world of warcraft sucks, no ? So when people ask "give us wow classic", what they really want is "give us a nice version of the game" And the team failed to do that multiple times Is this wrong ? Probably

> And the underlying problem is that newer world of warcraft sucks, no ? no. retail has more players than classic. they just had a massively successful expansion release. > So when people ask "give us wow classic", what they really want is "give us a nice version of the game" no, they want classic. you are re-learning what blizzard finally learned. people literally just wanted classic wow.

So what, they want nostalgy ?

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#143

Post by HauntingPin »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #94
john_strinlai wrote: post #12

> Ignore feature requests — don't build what users ask for; understand the underlying problem instead not quite in the same area, but this advice reminds me of blizzard and world of warcraft. for years and years, people requested a "classic" WoW (for non-players, the classic version is an almost bug-for-bug copy of the original 2004-2005 version of the game). for years and years, the reply from blizzard was "you thin…

But they didn't actually build WoW classic. They just built another version of the game. Gameplay wise it is drastically different. Economics & business wise it is very simple while it is popular: monetization.

Explain. Classic is nigh identical to the old version in all the ways that matter, primarily gameplay, with fairly minor improvements.

Drastically? What are you talking about?

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#144

Post by HauntingPin »

JackSlateur wrote: post #141
john_strinlai wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And the underlying problem is that newer world of warcraft sucks, no ? no. retail has more players than classic. they just had a massively successful expansion release. > So when people ask "give us wow classic", what they really want is "give us a nice version of the game" no, they want classic. you are re-learning what blizzard finally learned. people literally just wanted classic wow.

So what, they want nostalgy ?

Classic represents a different design philosophy. One that still appeals today. It has nothing to do with nostalgia. Or games like Project Gorgon wouldn't be so appealing to people.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#145

Post by twitchard »

Coreutils gets updates regularly! https://gitweb.git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git

Even `ls` gets news flags from time to time.

I think "stopping" is great for software that people want to be stable (like `ls`) but lots of software (web frameworks, SaaS) people start using specifically because they want a stream of updates and they want their software to get better over time.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#146

Post by WillAdams »

wenbin wrote: post #87
paxys wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are basically describing all software ever shipped before webapps and online updates became a thing. Companies wrote software and sold them in boxes. You paid once and it was yours forever. You got exactly what was in the box, no more and no less. The company then shipped a new verson in a different box 1-3 years later. If you liked it enough, and wanted the new features, you bought the new box.

Yea, good old days :) The catch was that old boxed software eventually breaks on new OS versions or devices. However, SaaS has the potential to "freeze" features while remaining functional 20+ years down the road. Behind the scenes, developers can update server dependencies and push minor fixes to ensure compatibility with new browsers and screen sizes. From the end-user's perspective, the product remains unchanged a…

Or, as in the case of Microsoft Publisher, announce that it will be going away on a certain date with no recourse.

Before 10/26 I have to re-work my desk position manual and a deposit sheet which use Publisher and which MS Word is _not_ suited for. Probably will do them in LyX or LaTeX.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#147

Post by twodave »

Yeah, I've written about this before on this site. Incentives in software licensing have gotten really stupid since the Internet (and more importantly, since the typical user's bandwidth has increased enough to allow all software installation to happen totally online). Now, too many pieces of software are a revenue-extraction optimization problem instead of attempting to serve a space or solve a specific problem.

There are great exceptions to this rule, even in paid software, where the authors are significantly poorer in exchange for producing better software. I imagine the authors of BeyondCompare or Magnet (for example) could have done a lot better financially for a while using a recurring license model.

There are also really stupid applications of this rule, such as what has happened with AutoMapper and MediatR in the last year or so, where the only meaningful commits since going commercial are the bits that check your license and try to fool you into paying :/

It seems like this shouldn't be a problem. It often only takes one developer willing to make a sacrifice to make a particular class of software available that actually attempts to solve the problem and nothing more. But in reality what we see is over time those developers that did make a stand start to look out for themselves (which I have no problem with) and try to take what they can while they have market share.

How do we find a way to live in a world where developers can build useful things and be rewarded for it while also preventing every piece of software from turning into shit? I'm not sure what the answer is.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#148

Post by dcchambers »

I agree with this basically 100%.

> Say no by default — every feature has a hidden cost: complexity, maintenance, edge cases

AI-assisted development is blowing up this long-standing axiom in the software development world, and I am afraid it's a terrible thing.

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#149

Post by JackSlateur »

HauntingPin wrote: post #144
JackSlateur wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what, they want nostalgy ?

Classic represents a different design philosophy. One that still appeals today. It has nothing to do with nostalgia. Or games like Project Gorgon wouldn't be so appealing to people.

So we are back to what I said earlier :p

People do not want "classic": people want a "good" game that has some specific characteristics

Post reply on HN