http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660Adi, Sorry, I didn't notice that it was a link. Reading now. http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment11http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment11Wed, 07 Mar 2007 20:31:37 GMTDid you read my post? http://dotmad.blogspot.com/2007/03/customers-dont-want-cutting-edge-stuff.html http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment10http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment10Wed, 07 Mar 2007 20:17:47 GMTAdi, Definitely stupid. http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment9http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment9Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:55:17 GMTStupid or careful? http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment8http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment8Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:50:35 GMT Three New "Working with Data in ASP.NET 2.0" Tutorials Now Available [Via: Scott Mitchell ] Tip/Trick:... http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment7http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment7Wed, 07 Mar 2007 03:56:47 GMTHey, I feel you. I'm on your side all the way, but some people just can't break habits or understand that there is a better way. We've had I've had two customers decide against using C#. The reason? They felt VB.NET was an "easier" language - or they did not want to bring in a "new" language (both VB6 shops). Another customer has more than one sw project manager that repeatedly refers to "unit tests" as developers who run the application on their machines manually (still after me thoroughly teaching them). Why am I thinking of this Monty Python sketch? http://www.richardpettinger.com/funny/blog/archive/2006/10/15/video_four_yorkshire_mans_sketch http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment6http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment6Tue, 06 Mar 2007 07:49:56 GMT@Mathias, I don't argue that this is not the way it works. I simply think that this is not a good approach. I find that not using smart approaches ends up doing a lot of damage to the product, reducing the ability to work and increasing the amount of work required to handle bug fixes/new features. I think that customers that choose this approach end up harming themselves. http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment5http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment5Tue, 06 Mar 2007 03:39:08 GMTI think a lot of time people are faking the picture, by intention or ignorance. There are many programmers refuse to use a more scientific approach to find out the truth, thats how MS's sucker framework survive so long. Because people use their blind beliefs instead of their great brains to understand stuff. (It ends up their brain is depreciated anyway :( ) http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment4http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment4Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:37:37 GMTLike Mathias said, that is just the reality of it all. That's how business want to operate because it produces lower costs in the short term. Even though the long term benefits should be obvious with a high abstraction, smarter tools, extensible design approach and whatnot, that just doesn't seem to translate to $ to a lot of decision makers. Its a shame, for sure, but its also the reality of it all. They love to bring in the intermediates to be able to maintain a system at lower overhead after the big dogs have already come in and implemented it. They just don't always understand the cost from a different perspective, which is the software and associated costs for it to evolve. http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment3http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment3Mon, 05 Mar 2007 14:23:49 GMTI had a small dose of this recently when I proposed using MonoRail on a project. Though, it was more of "we want technology that is standard" (i.e., ASP.NET/WebForms). I personally feel that well-factored, well-designed code is more readable and maintainable, even by lower level programmers. Part of the idea is to demonstrate _intent_. Good code has more clarity (that's why it needs less comments, if any.) Finally, I have seen lots of code written by average programmers that was nightmarishly difficult to understand and maintain. I have seen that on little jobs and multi-million dollar projects http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment2http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment2Mon, 05 Mar 2007 13:54:54 GMTLove your blog and I buy your arguments, but that's beside the point. Let me give you some perspective. I've worked as a sw-consultant in the financial business for a little over 10 years. This is the reality of the market. I see it all the time. The customer will get what they are willing to pay for, and that does not include anything they think is too hard to maintain for years using their own people. I don't intend to be rude, but you either deal with that or go find an ivory tower. http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment1http://ayende.com/2161/great-code-and-average-programmers#comment1Mon, 05 Mar 2007 11:39:19 GMT