Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> As engineers, we are, by nature, attracted to novel solutions.

I'm not, I'm attracted to proven battle-hardened solutions that have stood the test of time.

I won't dismiss new frameworks and languages and I might try them out in my spare time, but I approach them with skepticism until enough time has passed.

And I'm sure I'm not the only one.



Couldn’t agree more. Professionals use battle proven tools. Amateurs reach for whatever is the most shiny tech currently being pushed by cloud providers or open source advocates.


I'm attracted to doing more with less. I find that people are really bad at factoring in all costs, though, and, in particular, the maintenance cost. Battle-hardened solutions are generally easier to maintain and easier to find people who can maintain them. Shiny new frameworks might reduce some immediate costs, but it might not be a good overall solution.

This failure to factor in costs is everywhere. Like people will talk about how fast their car is. Yes, but how much energy is it using? Going twice as fast but using four times as much energy isn't impressive, nor are the enormous environmental and social costs. As a society we are constantly being conditioned to do this, of course. It's basically the whole point of marketing.




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

Search: