> But as you might think, nobody at AMD envisioned it that way in the planning or design stages. No engineer would ever start working with the idea to “build a shit product”;
That made me chuckle. There are many reason for why a design turns sour, but actual malice is rarely on of them - although it may feel that way for the user.
On the other hand: I can very well imagine some senior staff rolling eyes but feeling unfree to 'spoil the mood' by explaining how certain choices are going to come back and create problems later on.
I find it superinteresting, but also superhard to have that sort of feedback as things are ongoing. I've seen both happen (old hats hating progress too), but I was never successful (not in those larger above-my-paygrade-but-visible-nonetheless) in having a conversation about how we're having the discussion and whether or not every point/everyone is seriously hearda and considered. There can be a 'mood' that is overriding, and I haven't found a way to override the mood. Things tend to have to break down before that can happen.
I've found that when in discussions where choices made now will create problems in the future it's useful to raise that issue by couching it as a potential issue of priorities. Yes, the short-term solution may create problems in the long-term but sometimes the short-term priorities are more important. Taking on a tech debt isn't inherently bad, it's when you take it on unknowingly or without a full understanding of the terms of that debt that it goes bad.
Just as with any other debt, the cost in the long term must be balanced against the needs of the short term. And as with any other debt, if someone takes on that debt and then decides to ignore repayment there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth when the bill comes due. ;)
That made me chuckle. There are many reason for why a design turns sour, but actual malice is rarely on of them - although it may feel that way for the user.