Software works 80-90% of the team exactly as it should.
Either you work in a non-standard field, or your standards for software are way too low.
What software gets to fail 80% of the time? If your ecommerce checkout software fails 1 in 5 times, you don't have an ecommerce business at all, you are dead in the water. If your airline booking software fails for 1 in 5 customers, you are out of business.
99.99% reliability still means 1 in 10000 customers are experiencing an error, which at scale can mean thousands to millions per day. That's completely unacceptable for any software I've ever been involved with writing.
I think you might be taking that number a bit too literally. What I mean is, it works enough that no one is complaining. But, all software has bugs. Some are logic/syntax bugs, and some are intent. "It should do this, but actually does that."
The sum of ALL of these classes of bugs is such that our clients haven't complained about the software being particularly faulty. It's impossible to tell if it's more or less buggy than it would've been written entirely by hand, but I suspect it's less buggy than it would be if written by hand.
I'm with you on this. It feels like it should matter, but everything is pointing to "it doesn't matter as much as you guys say that it matters". I had the same experience at work. I thought we would have way more bugs and problems, yet all I see is the same as ever, but faster. It's eye-opening, honestly
We are seeing the same. We are moving significantly faster and ship more complex stuff, and there are still bugs as they were in the before times, but nothing catastrophic, no gremlins in the machine. Our main worry is about process and communication, not the actual coding really.
Comments
Either you work in a non-standard field, or your standards for software are way too low.
What software gets to fail 80% of the time? If your ecommerce checkout software fails 1 in 5 times, you don't have an ecommerce business at all, you are dead in the water. If your airline booking software fails for 1 in 5 customers, you are out of business.
99.99% reliability still means 1 in 10000 customers are experiencing an error, which at scale can mean thousands to millions per day. That's completely unacceptable for any software I've ever been involved with writing.
I think you might be taking that number a bit too literally. What I mean is, it works enough that no one is complaining. But, all software has bugs. Some are logic/syntax bugs, and some are intent. "It should do this, but actually does that."
The sum of ALL of these classes of bugs is such that our clients haven't complained about the software being particularly faulty. It's impossible to tell if it's more or less buggy than it would've been written entirely by hand, but I suspect it's less buggy than it would be if written by hand.
I'm with you on this. It feels like it should matter, but everything is pointing to "it doesn't matter as much as you guys say that it matters". I had the same experience at work. I thought we would have way more bugs and problems, yet all I see is the same as ever, but faster. It's eye-opening, honestly
We are seeing the same. We are moving significantly faster and ship more complex stuff, and there are still bugs as they were in the before times, but nothing catastrophic, no gremlins in the machine. Our main worry is about process and communication, not the actual coding really.