Hacker News Reader

Comment by userbinator | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand why some single-developer Mastodon client app can absolutely reliably get notifications to my watch but Dexcom can't.

The same reason why software developed by individuals or small teams can be very high quality, while "enterprise" software is universally horrible; the former work in more self-structured and effective ways, but the latter usually involves tons of bureaucracy. This tends to introduction a selection bias to the types of developers who work in those environments.

View on HN

I’ve never met a dev who is pleased to be working on a shitty enterprise app.

In my experience working in enterprise software, we as the devs are far removed from any customer problems.

Those problems, when reported, go through some or all the layers of support engineers, product owners, and engineering managers and eventually get put on some every growing list of stuff to do.

The devs, being so far removed from customers, choose to focus on what they can see, which is usually just whatever feature was prioritized because big customer A was promised it would be ready by some date.

A single dev has no such barriers, as you were saying.

I've occasionally enjoyed working on an enterprise app, but it really depends on the team.

Was it a shitty enterprise app ;)

The two devs I know who worked on enterprise software both ended up getting an MBA on company time to move into management ASAP so they dont have to write code in the awful system and they get paid way more.

They ultimately get incentivized to contribute to the maze of "safe" processes, rule making busywork, and google docs writing for the next layer of management above them.

That’s a route too, sure.

I couldn’t stomach working in management at a big org, personally

Why blame the devs when management is who make the environment?

Or is your point that only lower quality devs have jobs at those places?

smart devs who like to iterate fast and build awesome software will leave rapidly when bogged down with paperwork and compulsory training courses.

And you end up left with only mediocre devs who just want to take the salary and be home by 5pm because they care far more about their family/hobbies/life more than the quality of the app they're building at work.

Yeah imagine those weirdos who care more about their family and lives over the app they build at work.

If your company relies on no-lifers to be successful, you’re running a bad company. This is a management issue.

> And you end up left with only mediocre devs who just want to take the salary and be home by 5pm because they care far more about their family/hobbies/life more than the quality of the app they're building at work.

I think it's amazing that in your mind this is a negative thing.

I think it's the not caring about quality before 5pm that GP was calling out.

Maybe, I'm not sure though. The "because" part is pretty directly saying that caring more about your family/hobbies/life than the app you're building at work is what makes them mediocre developers.

“Because that’s _all_ they care about”

That wasn't the quote. Why did you use quotation marks?

It's of course a very positive thing, but so is creating something great for other people to use.

The economic prosperity that affords us the opportunity to spend leisure time with our loved ones comes exclusively from great creations.

You don’t necessarily have to disregard family/hobbies/life in order to make great creations at work. One can still do great things clocking in at 9AM and clocking out at 5PM. It’s a myth that all great progress comes from Code Ninjas grinding 100 hour weeks, a myth that benefits companies and VC investors only.

Yes I agree - I’m just saying that there’s good things to be done at home and at work and the two must be in balance over the course of a lifetime, or else society decays.

Something about this makes me cringe. Not sure exactly what. I think it's the idea of "iterate fast and build awesome software" as it pertains to high integrity systems.

You don't iterate fast or slow when dealing with this shit. You do it at the exact speed you need to to fully understand the domain, failure modes, validation processes, etc. Similarly, you don't write "awesome software", you write exactly what is needed -- nothing more, nothing less, and what is there needs to go bang every time.

There is no reason to believe an enthusiastic day-tripper who starts getting bored when the grueling FMEA, design validation, etc. starts to kick in is a better choice than the salaryman who's prepared to do what needs to be done for the next 10+ years of the product lifecycle.

I say this as somebody that worked on an unreleased product that was on the cusp of safety critical and am glad that it didn't go to production in hindsight. It desperately needed less "awesome" software and a lot more "paperwork".

I don't think anyone here wants to hear this or understand it, but SWE work needs a hard reality check. I think a lot has been lost in the swirl of easy six figure salaries and recruiters constantly nagging you to jump ship and come work on awesome xyz. A downpour of VC money doing billion dollar shotgun blasts hoping to find just one gem.

Let me put it this way: If you had a team of EE's and ME's who all made between $150k and $250k, you would basically have the cream of the crop. A team that could make mars rovers or infallible pacemakers.

But a team of SWEs making that much? You get buggy weight loss apps and serially broken web access portals.

There are a variety of factors, not all of which may upend things but some probably will at least for certain classes of SWEs. Remote opportunities in lower cost areas, AI, and a glut of people who jumped in because that’s where the dollars were are a few that come to mind.

Doesn’t mean that competent SWEs will be destitute but salaries will probably trend more towards other typical engineering salaries—solid middle class professional salaries.

> smart devs who like to iterate fast and build awesome software will leave rapidly when bogged down with paperwork and compulsory training courses

Sure, when the market was hot this was most likely the case, but not everyone lives in the Bay Area and the choice of jobs that _aren't_ like this is much more slim.

>Why blame the devs when management is who make the environment?

Man, every second thread is something like this; "It's the MBAs! It's the managers!". As if every single employee doesn't affect "the environment".

What do you consider your responsibility, as a developer? Just following orders? Why not have a little accountability?

Devs have little to no control over what work we do when on large enterprise projects.

I’ve known many devs, myself included, who do speak up about user facing issues we’ve been keeping an eye on. We’re routinely ignored, moved to a different team, or, in the worst case, let go.

The best way to affect change is to keep your head down until you’re in a management position.

It’s as they say, “the fish rots from the head”

So you're asking devs to fight a dysfunctional and possibly aggressively punitive organization?

The real-world solution to those situations is the company falters and learns or fails and dies.

Which is why monopolies and TBTF are so toxic to our workplace - bad employers who leverage suppliers/customers in a bad way and institutionalized workers who then move to other organizations and bring their diseased ideology with them make things worse for everyone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com