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

This is the top comment, but I'm confused about how it relates to the linked article. The article doesn't really advocate outsourcing your software to third parties, just consolidating the infrastructure that you do own (sometimes in clever ways, like recursing your own PaaS) to make it as simple as possible.


From the article:

> Software that you write is software that you have to maintain. Forever. Don’t succumb to NIH when there’s a well supported public solution that fits just as well (or even almost as well).

While this idea has a lot of merit, it's not as black-and-white. (Most things in the world aren't, too.)


And frankly the "(or even almost as well)" is just wrong. I can't count how many times I've seen projects fail due to trying to shoehorn the problem into some existing solution because the NIH syndrome was so strong. Really if at first glance it looks like a perfect fit, it isn't, but you might get it to work. If right off you can see how it is not quite a fit, don't think you can make it work because you are most probably wrong. It will either fail outright or end up being way more work than if you had just solved it with custom code.




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

Search: