this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
108 points (91.5% liked)

Programming

17374 readers
293 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thingsiplay@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

@canpolat The article is written from the perspective of a Windows user. I'm not surprised. Software as a whole does not get worse; there are some software which get worse, and some technology getting in the way. And then there is software which get better, not worse too. If you cherry pick, then you can prove any point you want to proven right; especially on a very wide range of topics like software.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Yeah this article is definitely suffering from a lot of biases in its logic. First off, they are cherry-picking, but there’s also survivorship bias in there.

For an obvious counter example, look at Blender. It’s gotten amazingly good even though it’s gotten more complex over the last 10 years or so.

[–] canpolat@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not sure it's that simple, really. And I definitely don't think this is limited to Windows. I agree with other comments that this is mostly related to complexity. The more complex the domain the more difficult it is to implement/maintain a good solution. Delivering the new shiny feature is more exciting for all people (product management, development, users, etc.) than to fix bugs. And if you don't have the resources/maturity to keep technical debt under control, the software quality will suffer over time. Free software may be the exception here as profit is not always the primary concern.

[–] thingsiplay@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@canpolat My point was not being limited to Windows, but more that his view is limited to DOS/Windows world, but making general judgements about software. And because Windows and it's eco system of applications he listed gets worse, he extrapolates this to all software.

Let's look at Linux, which is probably the biggest software ever and used on every possible way one can imagine. It got better and better, even though it's extremely big and has a lot of complexity to it and does not want to break compatibility if possible. But I am not saying all software is like that. That's my point. Some software get better, some get worse.

[–] canpolat@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

And because Windows and it’s eco system of applications he listed gets worse, he extrapolates this to all software.

They admit that bias in the article:

[...] since I've always been working in the Microsoft tech stack, I use a lot of it. Thus, selection bias clearly is at work here.

Now, I mentioned free software as the exception. I don't have any data as to how big free software vs proprietary software. But I think his points extends at least to other proprietary software and is not limited to Windows.

Some software get better, some get worse.

I can agree with that.