Comments on: All systems suck http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/ Laura Thomson's random thoughts and rants about tech and FOSS Thu, 17 May 2012 23:15:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: alan http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1583 alan Sat, 23 Jul 2011 13:30:50 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1583 Too bad that too few have heard about the IBM i. The least-suck OS. Wish sometimes they'd open-source it, but then maybe it would be as bad as the rest of them. A code base of zillions of code and projects banned if they don't have a budget, means enhancements in usually small increments (not always small) and about 30-40% of developer time spent in fixes. Too bad that too few have heard about the IBM i. The least-suck OS. Wish sometimes they’d open-source it, but then maybe it would be as bad as the rest of them.

A code base of zillions of code and projects banned if they don’t have a budget, means enhancements in usually small increments (not always small) and about 30-40% of developer time spent in fixes.

]]> By: Lukasz Sztygiel http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1254 Lukasz Sztygiel Thu, 16 Jun 2011 09:27:35 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1254 yes I agree, I'm quite young developer with 6 years commercial experience but last years I have spent looking for ideal job with perfect environment (I relocated to UK from Poland). But must of them SUCKS. Even if they have methodologies which do implement by great smart guys, but they usually they don't have time becouse projects need to much flexibility and they need to find compromise between great coding standard, best development practises and time estimation. yes I agree, I’m quite young developer with 6 years commercial experience but last years I have spent looking for ideal job with perfect environment (I relocated to UK from Poland). But must of them SUCKS. Even if they have methodologies which do implement by great smart guys, but they usually they don’t have time becouse projects need to much flexibility and they need to find compromise between great coding standard, best development practises and time estimation.

]]> By: Gervase Markham http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1224 Gervase Markham Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:58:43 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1224 Embrace The Suck. All systems suck - we just need to realise that's OK. Ship early, ship often - and each time you ship, make it suck a bit less. But ship - don't delay until you think it doesn't suck any more. Iterate. I think one big difference between small, agile companies (which Mozilla hopefully is, or should be) and big, slow-moving ones is that the small ones are happy to embrace the suck. And they normally end up with something that doesn't suck quicker than the other way, and have helped a bunch of people along the line as well. Embrace The Suck.

All systems suck - we just need to realise that’s OK. Ship early, ship often - and each time you ship, make it suck a bit less. But ship - don’t delay until you think it doesn’t suck any more. Iterate.

I think one big difference between small, agile companies (which Mozilla hopefully is, or should be) and big, slow-moving ones is that the small ones are happy to embrace the suck. And they normally end up with something that doesn’t suck quicker than the other way, and have helped a bunch of people along the line as well.

]]> By: eRadical http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1215 eRadical Fri, 27 May 2011 10:44:23 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1215 Great post. We could introduce a new metric: level of suckiness :) Great post. We could introduce a new metric: level of suckiness :)

]]> By: Mark http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1209 Mark Tue, 24 May 2011 13:41:30 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1209 This reminds me of a song from of yore called Every OS Sucks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d85p7JZXNy8&feature=player_detailpage#t=83s This reminds me of a song from of yore called Every OS Sucks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d85p7JZXNy8&feature=player_detailpage#t=83s

]]> By: Simon http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1207 Simon Mon, 23 May 2011 22:01:36 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1207 @Immobilier - nope, in my experience, modularity just ends up hiding most of the suck in places the average developer doesn't need to know about. And that's a good thing, up until the point where the magic stops working, and someone has to work out how it was supposed to work. @smo - a development environment can't prevent sucky code, but a good one will at least help mitigate the problem. @Immobilier - nope, in my experience, modularity just ends up hiding most of the suck in places the average developer doesn’t need to know about. And that’s a good thing, up until the point where the magic stops working, and someone has to work out how it was supposed to work.

@smo - a development environment can’t prevent sucky code, but a good one will at least help mitigate the problem.

]]> By: smo http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1206 smo Mon, 23 May 2011 17:32:24 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1206 I'll beat a different horse for a change: the development environment. They are always get sold to us as the easy way to a optimal (i.e. low-suckiness ranking) final product. I have yet to see a development system that makes it hard for me to develop things that sooner or later will suck. smo I’ll beat a different horse for a change: the development environment. They are always get sold to us as the easy way to a optimal (i.e. low-suckiness ranking) final product. I have yet to see a development system that makes it hard for me to develop things that sooner or later will suck.

smo

]]> By: Chimacintosh http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1205 Chimacintosh Mon, 23 May 2011 17:29:35 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1205 There are perfect systems but ones that we can't connect to yet. It is pretty nifty that matter never seems to be created or destroyed. If we could somehow design a computation system on that, we would be out of a job. In the lab are quantum computers so I suspect that in the next 50 years we will have systems that don't rely on software to run. They will run using the logic in nature. I suspect then, that systems willbe more stable than mission critical systems used in Nuclear facilities are today. So bottom line, not yet, but soon! There are perfect systems but ones that we can’t connect to yet. It is pretty nifty that matter never seems to be created or destroyed. If we could somehow design a computation system on that, we would be out of a job. In the lab are quantum computers so I suspect that in the next 50 years we will have systems that don’t rely on software to run. They will run using the logic in nature. I suspect then, that systems willbe more stable than mission critical systems used in Nuclear facilities are today.

So bottom line, not yet, but soon!

]]> By: Julian Seward http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1204 Julian Seward Mon, 23 May 2011 17:16:33 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1204 Wonderful! Made me laugh. I totally agree. Wonderful! Made me laugh. I totally agree.

]]> By: Lukas Blakk http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/05/all-systems-suck/#comment-1203 Lukas Blakk Mon, 23 May 2011 16:46:28 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=133#comment-1203 Not only gets me up in the mornings, keeps me employed :) But seriously. I don't know if you've read "Thinking in Systems" by Donella Meadows or not - if not, I highly recommend it. It encourages the reader to think about systems separately from the actual computer. I enjoyed looking at a system and examining the components: inputs/outputs/goals/feedback loops. I would hazard a guess that the reason a lot of our systems suck is a combination of conflicting goals where needing to just solve the problem in front of our face battles with the desire to create a longer term solution that would improve more pain points and be "future-proof" (impossible!). In RelEng we are often trying to balance those two. What happens? We re-write our systems every couple of years to try and handle the Brave New World we're in that our systems aren't prepared for. Rather than think I could actually write a system now that can handle that future I much prefer that we stay flexible enough to continually re-visit our systems and tear things out/enhance as needed. Best thing I learned in school was how to read other people's code and it's been invaluable for this exact scenario :) Not only gets me up in the mornings, keeps me employed :)

But seriously. I don’t know if you’ve read “Thinking in Systems” by Donella Meadows or not - if not, I highly recommend it. It encourages the reader to think about systems separately from the actual computer. I enjoyed looking at a system and examining the components: inputs/outputs/goals/feedback loops. I would hazard a guess that the reason a lot of our systems suck is a combination of conflicting goals where needing to just solve the problem in front of our face battles with the desire to create a longer term solution that would improve more pain points and be “future-proof” (impossible!). In RelEng we are often trying to balance those two. What happens? We re-write our systems every couple of years to try and handle the Brave New World we’re in that our systems aren’t prepared for. Rather than think I could actually write a system now that can handle that future I much prefer that we stay flexible enough to continually re-visit our systems and tear things out/enhance as needed. Best thing I learned in school was how to read other people’s code and it’s been invaluable for this exact scenario :)

]]>