Gear Acquisition Syndrome

Photographers tend to suffer from Gear Acquisition Syndrome. They believe they will make better pictures with new gear and buy new lenses, cameras, and flashlights.

Then they find their work does not improve.

In IT, we do the same.

We have our old relational database management system.

But now we have this great Spark, MongoDB, CouchDB, or what have you. (I’m just taking a not-so-random example.) So now everything must be converted to Spark or Mongo.

We even forget that this old technology, the relational DBMS in this example, was so good at reliably processing transactions. It worked!

The new database is massively scalable, which is great. Unfortunately, it does not improve the reliability of processing our transactions.

But it’s hot, so we want it—because Google has it. Errr, but will you also use it to process web page indexes? Ah, no. You want to store your customer records in it. So, is it reliable? No. But it is satisfying our GAS.

Aesthetics and quality

  • Post category:Uncategorized
  • Reading time:3 mins read

Beautiful things are easier to use.

We can also apply this to technical designs. This often surprises a non-technical audience, but techies will recognize the beauty that can be present in technical solutions.

For example, symmetrical diagrams not only give a quick insight into an orderly, robust solution but are often also very appealing to the eye.

Symmetrical and well-colored diagrams are easier to read and understand.

Old PowerPoint presentations using the standard suggested colors were horrendously ugly, and I am sure the people using these colors did not want to be understood. (Nowadays, PowerPoint comes with more pleasing color schemes)

The success of the Python programming language is not in the least its forced readability. No crazy abbreviations as in C that make code unreadable (but programmers look very smart).

Beautiful code (yes, such a thing exists) is easier to read and understand.


If a
Then b
Else  If c
      Then d
      Else  If e
              Then f
…

versus


Case a
 b
Case c
 d
Case e
 f
…


It is pretty evident.

But do we care about the quality and beauty of code nowadays? Throw-away software is abundant. Software systems are built with the idea to throw them out and replace them within a few years.

Ursus Wehrli
Image by Ursus Wehrli

That is the idea. But the Lindy effect tells us differently.

Good programming is a profession that should be appreciated as such. Bad coding may be cheap, but only in the short run.

We don’t hire a moonlighter to build our house. We employ an architect and a construction professional who can make a comfortable house that can be used for generations.

Chris Verhoef debunking myths about legacy and COBOL

  • Post category:COBOL
  • Reading time:1 mins read

Last week, the De Technoloog, a BNR program, had a very nice interview with Professor Chris Verhoef of VU University. The interviewers, Herbert Blankesteijn and Ben van der Burg, were surprised to find that COBOL is not bad and is very good for programming administrative automation processes. Legacy is not an issue. Not allowing time for maintenance is a management issue. He mentioned the Lindy effect which tells us that the life expectancy of old code increases with time. The established code is anti-fragile.