Why Software Development is Different ...
1–10 of 23 posts
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#2I've debated this topic with many people, and while I think/wish it was true that developers were special people among the professional class; it isn't.
The things that make a good software developer are the things that make any professional good: learning = good, creativity (hard to measure stuff) = good, no consensus/uniqueness thinking = standard human problem, requirements are always hard and always suck.
Software development isn't different. It is just more loudly voiced on the internet because programmers have the most voice on the internet (by virtue of building the damn thing).
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#3I get where the first point is coming from in that the best developer can be many times more productive than an average one but that doesn't mean the average one can't make a contribution. Many great programs have come from people that have admitted that they don't find themselves to be the best programmers but picked a goal and worked hard towards it.
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#4uh, do you have any data to back any of this stuff up, particularly the conclusions?
btw, it's buffett. buffet is all-you-can eat luncheon etc., pronounced a la francaise.
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#5Elitist crap. What does he mean by significant contribution? Even the best developers need some help with any significant project because nobody develops code in a vacuum and the best projects tend to be used by many people with varying skill sets who over time tend to add their own contributions to the code.
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#6I get where the first point is coming from in that the best developer can be many times more productive than an average one but that doesn't mean the average one can't make a contribution. Many great programs have come from people that have admitted that they don't find themselves to be the best programmers but picked a goal and worked hard towards it.
Reading his points, I wonder how much experience he has and what the scope of his experience is.
My experience is that if you've got multidisciplinary teams populated with reasonable people who have a good grasp on real world constraints (usually a delicate balance of compromises between scope, quality, time and money), all of his four points break down.
On the measurement point: While I'm sure some of the more clueless companies might use some arcane and pointless measurement systems, I haven't seen any half-decent dev shop use any of the measurement practices he talks of.
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#7Elitist crap. What does he mean by significant contribution? Even the best developers need some help with any significant project because nobody develops code in a vacuum and the best projects tend to be used by many people with varying skill sets who over time tend to add their own contributions to the code.
Something that still resonates with me from university (which is pre-www) is a quote from one of my most cynical professors:
Most people who call themselves experts at something usually just read a couple of articles more than the next guy.
These days, you just have to write a blog entry with a slightly more authoritative tone than the next guy.
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#8This could be evidence of the argument that a lot of what people have to say has to do with the magnitude of their thoughts and less the actual direction.
I.e., if I say, I'm really, really happy right now. A trained psychologist, or someone who looks at it objectively, might note: there is this issue with happiness that I'm going through. Similarly, all of the points in this blog post usually are introduced via the very opposite stance (esp. the latter two -- i.e., requirements are the most important thing except for maybe measurement). But you can actually learn things from people if you look very objectively at what they're talking about and less the direction of their conclusions.
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#9It's hard to take seriously an article about how software development is different when it neglects to mention what exactly it is allegedly different from.
Re: Why Software Development is Different ...
#10I've debated this topic with many people, and while I think/wish it was true that developers were special people among the professional class; it isn't. The things that make a good software developer are the things that make any professional good: learning = good, creativity (hard to measure stuff) = good, no consensus/uniqueness thinking = standard human problem, requirements are always hard and always suck. Softwar…
You got that right brotha!
I'll add a bit more to your last statement about internet and programmers: these bloggers usually have had experienced the pain with software development in general but they rarely offer constructive criticism (like this article) or they would treat the symptoms (.e.g: coming up with new process, new tools, or new whatever).
The basic problem is still there: people (including themselves) are the problem.
Sort of the blinds leading the blinds.
Software Development is not too much different than gadget/hardware development. Just ask Nokia...