"Good software takes ten years, get used to it":
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/07/21/good-software-take...
Sure a CRUD MVP can be cranked out in six months or less, but that's not what we're talking about.
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/07/21/good-software-take...
Sure a CRUD MVP can be cranked out in six months or less, but that's not what we're talking about.
Photoshop is an example of a product that still maintains its market fit after decades, and why folks complain about alternatives.
The part I disagree with is the idea that you get to done. Photoshop is a great example. It's over 30 years old. Would Photoshop still hold its market position if it reached maturity 20 years ago and said "we're done?" Ignore UI changes and support for new OSes for a second. Would Photoshop be the market leader without Camera RAW support? High Dynamic Range? GPU acceleration?
Just look at Photoshop's version history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Photoshop_version_history
You don't have to agree with every change they've made, but there's a lot of serious features that got released after Year 10 that are need-to-have features. I don't think Photoshop 5.5 was the last Photoshop professionals needed.
Meanwhile, Affinity Photo is only four years old, and while if you had to choose between them Photoshop still has a lot of things Affinity doesn't, I'd pick it over Photoshop 5.5 in a heartbeat.
> So, it takes a long time to write a good program, but when it’s done, it’s done. Oh sure, you can crank out a new version every year or two, trying to get the upgrade revenues, but eventually people will ask: “why fix what ain’t broken?”