
Why the boss wants you to build that Software in-house? - proofmaster
https://medium.com/@nesovok/why-build-software-in-house-not-f3c9bc726b1#.qlulrxtgn
======
tracker1
While interesting, the conclusions just aren't true. Here's one more in favor
of in-house.

Integrating the vendor solution will be more complex for the sake of unused
feature over a simpler solution developed in-house.

Another: The solution to our problem doesn't use the other pieces we want/need
to integrate, or doesn't exist. There's several solutions to manage docker
clusters now, and effort has been made, but when they all started (some
originally in-house) those solutions weren't widely available.

Another: the existing vendor solutions are sub-par for our needs (and/or the
needs of our customers). Could you imagine if Joyent had just used VMWare as
it's virtualization solution instead of the Jails from their OS based on
Solaris? They have the only solution with _really_ locked down Docker.

Sometimes creating a new trail really is the better solution. I wrote a test
LMS a bit over a decade ago, that worked well enough for a lot of integrations
before being replaced by a big vendor's LMS and it cost more for the
integration alone than the customizations to the one I built... 10 years of
service cost less than the 1 year of integration.

------
tropo
He didn't mention the big reason for in-house: security

Telling an outsider about your needs (revealing insider info, trade secrets,
etc.) is risky. It's even worse if the result will not be fully air-gap
isolated from the Internet. That gives somebody a hole into your business.

