Looking for books & other references mentioned in this video? Check out the video description for all the links! Want early access to videos & exclusive perks? Join our channel membership today: ruclips.net/channel/UCs_tLP3AiwYKwdUHpltJPuAjoin Question for you: What’s your biggest takeaway from this video? Let us know in the comments! ⬇
Designing software isn’t at all like designing a building or a bridge. Software is about abstract business processes and cultural processes and the flow of data through those abstract processes. Software is fluid and changes over time whereas buildings and bridges require rigidity. For this reason, engineering and software engineering will always require very different processes and approaches.
Agree. Also - when a client wants a bridge over a river, or a building that will serve a certain goal - it's usually a well defined requirement/problem, which is different for software where we usually figure out what the problem really is on the go (together with the client) and it changes over time because the business environment and world changes.
I think that this is not a very accurate view of engineering or bridge building. Early planes were worse than modern planes, they evolved and changed purpose, design, construction over time through a process of engineering. Bridges change patterns of use, and are modified over time if patterns of use change. Sure, software amplifies this need for malleability, and shortens the timescales, but there is no such fundamental difference. Engineering is not about defining some fixed solution to a problem, all bridges and all planes aren't alike. Engineering is about ruling out the dumb ideas, and we aren't very good at that in software. So I think we need more engineering thinking, and this is perfectly applicable to software, and when you work in a more structured way, you build better software faster.
I also don’t think “production is free” is quite correct either. Maybe it applies in the case that development actually succeeds. I know several multi-hundred million dollar software projects that failed and were abandoned.
What Dave was saying is that we don’t have to build our systems from scratch again to put them into a production environment. We build them in a development environment, and the work that was done can be transferred into a production environment at no extra cost. So in that sense - yes, production is free.
No agility in software development, it was and still is a long tedious process, and no viable shorcuts available. Yes process franework like scrum is important but does not automatically guarantee a good software. You still need to put in the work, hard work. When these people talk they surely inspire, until reality hits you. It is still up to you and your team and your actions that determines what will be the outcome.
Testing micro services independently is not really possible without well defined contracts. To say that micro services are independent is an exaggeration
Building better software faster is a very poor focus. Actually, it's not a focus at all. Building bad software fast - is a good focus. If you can build 100 products instead of one, and every one is only 10 times worse than that theoretical one, you multiply your chances to success tenfold. Building good software slow - is also a great focus. We definitely need mission critical software and we have time to build it. I used to work in NPP automation, we had 30-years long maintenance contracts there. If you're aiming for decades of maintenance, you can certainly afford years of development. But targeting both quality and quantity at the same time is not a focus, it's a bad case of astigmatism.
Looking for books & other references mentioned in this video?
Check out the video description for all the links!
Want early access to videos & exclusive perks?
Join our channel membership today: ruclips.net/channel/UCs_tLP3AiwYKwdUHpltJPuAjoin
Question for you: What’s your biggest takeaway from this video? Let us know in the comments! ⬇
⁰⁰⁰
Co
gh12 Aj Aj h70. mayhemyi
ks
Best video g
oy jop.ooouuj2
bMLv
Terima kasih.
Thank you very much, Sakasatria Saka. This is much appreciated! ⭐
Great talk!
Designing software isn’t at all like designing a building or a bridge. Software is about abstract business processes and cultural processes and the flow of data through those abstract processes. Software is fluid and changes over time whereas buildings and bridges require rigidity. For this reason, engineering and software engineering will always require very different processes and approaches.
Agree. Also - when a client wants a bridge over a river, or a building that will serve a certain goal - it's usually a well defined requirement/problem, which is different for software where we usually figure out what the problem really is on the go (together with the client) and it changes over time because the business environment and world changes.
I think that this is not a very accurate view of engineering or bridge building. Early planes were worse than modern planes, they evolved and changed purpose, design, construction over time through a process of engineering. Bridges change patterns of use, and are modified over time if patterns of use change. Sure, software amplifies this need for malleability, and shortens the timescales, but there is no such fundamental difference.
Engineering is not about defining some fixed solution to a problem, all bridges and all planes aren't alike. Engineering is about ruling out the dumb ideas, and we aren't very good at that in software. So I think we need more engineering thinking, and this is perfectly applicable to software, and when you work in a more structured way, you build better software faster.
Amazing meeting, thanks
WoW. Two legends next to each other 🤩
The pain of discipline is always less than pain of regret.
Wow. Great meeting. Simon, Dave, and Hannes are big names of Software Architecture! Thanks for sharing that!
What an awesome talk - thanks for sharing that!
Amazing talk
I also don’t think “production is free” is quite correct either. Maybe it applies in the case that development actually succeeds. I know several multi-hundred million dollar software projects that failed and were abandoned.
What Dave was saying is that we don’t have to build our systems from scratch again to put them into a production environment. We build them in a development environment, and the work that was done can be transferred into a production environment at no extra cost. So in that sense - yes, production is free.
Worker and pilot
I listened to the whole thing. Very enjoyable.
I think Margaret Hamilton invented the term 'Software Engineering' - I would appreciate her thoughts on the idea today.
Credit to Kevlin Henney, from whom I learned this.
I do have diificulty in understanding them. What dialect of English are they speaking?
They talk using british accent
“English” english 😉
The moderator really wants to have separate repos haha.
who is GOTO conference's competitor?
Questions can come in ⬆️....
Qcon
The downside to this talk is that a lot of businesses right now want to hear about micro services, and trust me… the grass is not greener.
No agility in software development, it was and still is a long tedious process, and no viable shorcuts available. Yes process franework like scrum is important but does not automatically guarantee a good software. You still need to put in the work, hard work. When these people talk they surely inspire, until reality hits you.
It is still up to you and your team and your actions that determines what will be the outcome.
Testing micro services independently is not really possible without well defined contracts. To say that micro services are independent is an exaggeration
On magpie development and shiny - I find it amusing and appalling that R has a web server etc. that is literally called that ...
Very interesting video good all the best nice 👍 great job
Building better software faster is a very poor focus. Actually, it's not a focus at all.
Building bad software fast - is a good focus. If you can build 100 products instead of one, and every one is only 10 times worse than that theoretical one, you multiply your chances to success tenfold.
Building good software slow - is also a great focus. We definitely need mission critical software and we have time to build it. I used to work in NPP automation, we had 30-years long maintenance contracts there. If you're aiming for decades of maintenance, you can certainly afford years of development.
But targeting both quality and quantity at the same time is not a focus, it's a bad case of astigmatism.
Di terjemah kan bahasa Indonesia lebih bagus...👍👍👍👍
جرنل صاحب ان تینوں کے علاوہ کوئی اور طاقت ھے تو اس کی دلیل دین
I think that design & architecture is very sexy 😊
👏
😊
Top ⁰
#sajjadfoodsecrets