Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Business owners and managers, you are a big part of the problem (unixsheikh.com)
19 points by iio7 13 days ago | hide | past | favorite | 8 comments

The number of companies currently on the Nasdaq that got their Sequoia funding while having a bunch of functioning flaming poo for code kinda proves him wrong.

The startup graveyard contains the corpses of many “perfect architectures”.

This reminds me of people whining about rails and it’s performance issues at scale. Rails helps you have the luxury of surviving until you get to experience performance issues at scale.

This author misses the point that the first problem a business faces is how to get customers and how to please them. Getting customers is the number one priority -- perfect architecture is only important to the degree that helps get customers.

Business owners and managers do need to understand that they may have to rewrite the software from the ground up because the first version will have all the problems the author talks about.

Most business owners and managers actually do understand this already. The goal of the first version is not to be architecturally perfect. The goal of the first version is to see if anyone will care if it exists. This is a good argument for not always building on the first version of a startup idea -- but actually build it again once you know people will buy.

I don't doubt that the author has seen all kinds of oddness while contracting, but I think they have seriously mis-diagnosed some or all of the problem.

I mean, sure, it would be really nice to pour concrete and wait for it to thoroughly completely and totally dry before starting to build a house on it. And any builder that did that would be run out of business by those builders that start building as soon as the surface level dries, and therefore finishes weeks earlier. So the metaphor doesn't even work as a metaphor, let alone in practice.

Because in practice, the companies that spent the time to get everything lined up perfectly before launching were beaten to market by companies that iterated. They started with a skateboard, upgraded to a bicycle, at some point added a motor, and later some seats, and so on, with revenue from customers paying for the upgrades.

The bit about lockin and high expenses with server less seemed extra-strange to me, given that my company, 22 years in, replaced VMs in a datacenter with AWS serverless stacks and cut costs dramatically. Sure, we couldn't easily migrate away from AWS if we wanted to, but... I don't know if you've noticed, but AWS seems to be growing, not shrinking. Amazon is delivering extraordinary value for a wide variety of use cases, and choosing an inferior tech stack to avoid lock-in seems really, really dumb.

Anyway, bizarre misguided rant, IMO.

I've never seen anyone have such strong opinions that seem to completely clash with what I have experienced reality to be. I'd love to see someone that says this take their own advice and build a business based on those principles. Surely if its the best way it will outcompete and outsurvive othets, then we'll have something to replicate.

> but it's not going to last in the long run

Businesses also won’t last in the long run

> This bad hand drawing (sorry, I'm not an artist)

Why not get real art work from an artist ? Oh you needed something quick for the blogpost

I don’t see anything in the author’s bio about building successful businesses. I don’t mean to slight them, but most of these posts take zero consideration for what it takes to get a business off the ground. Writing every bit of code by hand assumes infinite financial resources and runway. Some points are valid - don’t bloat and shove garbage in when you can take a simpler approach.

I have a hard time getting past the foundation metaphor. I agree with it, but stability of a foundation is not just "doesn't crash" but also "doesn't change." And that is something our industry just flat rejects.

In my fantasy world this is a useful screed.

The world I see is different. You have your dominant companies and their web apps. They set the standard and cultural forces (what's cool, modern, high quality) push everyone to adopt or get left behind (loss of user growth, status, money).

Because we are all competing for attention and dollars, this is capitalism after all, we'll keep trying to outdo each other. And the big kids with the cool toys will set the standards and everyone else will race to keep up.

Cultural forces will indeed change, new tech will distrupt and new players emerge... But the invisible hand will soon be at work again and we'll be writing WASM blackbox web apps with kubernetes and a few blockchains running on on our laptops.

That too will pass, but we'll always be pushing, adding more complexity than strictly necessary for basic needs. It's what the system demands!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact