6 ms·
I think what it means is that as it stands now, there is no definite good/bad way to make successful software. There are just opinions.
by alexpersian 11y ago
I think what it means is that as it stands now, there is no definite good/bad way to make successful software. There are just opinions.
- buffoon 11y agoThere are definite bad ways. I've watched a few companies go down the shitter using known bad ways.
- Shish2k 11y agoI've watched a few companies go down the shitter using known good ways; and seen companies with mind-blowingly horrific software succeed based on marketing and contracts. There are a lot of anecdotes, but I have yet to see any data suggesting a correlation.
- icefox 11y agoIt also depends on your definition of successful. To be successful does software need to (check off what you think would matter): * Make money directly * Make money in-directly * Be used by at least 1 user (not including dev + dev friends and family) * Be alive and working in 6 months * Be alive and working in 2 years * Be alive and working in 10 years * Simply ship so dev gets a positive yearly review * Be bug free * Only crash N% of the time (who cares just re-run it and don't do the bad thing) * Quality / features don't matter as long as marketing is talking about it and people play with it so it looks successful. * Simply exist, but be subsidized by some one or something so devs keep hacking on it even if no one uses it. * Still be useful when there are zero devs working on it.