@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
Let me ask even more precise question because you do everything in your power to not actually address the point of my questions
I'm not being difficult on purpose, I just don't agree with a lot of the premises of your questions. For example:
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
do you believe that the defining characteristic of "perfect development software" is enabling people with knowledge equivalent to American 8th grade graduate and no additional knowledge about anything whatsoever to create working software?
In a perfect world there wouldn't be any such thing as "development software" because you'd just ask the computer for what you want and it'd do it. Like in Star Trek TNG shows.
But generally yes, any additional knowledge you need to work your development tool should be taught by the tool itself. And of course it should do as much as possible automatically so there's no boilerplate or anything.
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
Does it mean we SHOULDN'T strive for "perfect development software" as defined above? God, getting you to actually answer the questions I'm asking is so hard.
No? I'm not sure where you got that from.
- Doing UX testing = good
- Writing development software anybody can use = better
It's not hard.
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
Only if the only thing that matters was ease of use by people who have no fucking clue what they're doing. But for people who actually know what they're doing, it's far more important for tools to be easy to use by people who know what they're doing. And these two goals are often mutually exclusive.
They aren't mutually exclusive at all.
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
And software development software is written to solve the problem of developing software.
"developing software" Isn't a thing though. It's a means, not an end.
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
There are also people whose actual job is to develop software that helps with software developers. Visual Studio division at Microsoft, for example.
Yeah; they're doing a shitty job.
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
HyperCard was only about writing simple scripts that wired up to buttons of existing programs.
You never used it obviously.
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
It's a completely different scope than general software development.
Untrue.
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
But making them write software isn't going to achieve that - quite the opposite.
Maybe; but what we're doing now certainly isn't helping, is it?
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
Do you seriously believe software development in general can ever become as simple as, say, retail cashier's work? Because that's what I meant when I said most problem domains are simpler than software development.
"most problem domains" == "making change". Ok, good to know? Glad you clarified?
@Gąska said in Software disenchantment:
Purpose-built software for one specific discipline? Sure, we do this all the time. General software to solve all such problems once and for all? You must be kidding me.
Saying it's the ideal state doesn't imply that it's possible to achieve. That's the thing people get all in a huff about whenever we have one of these threads.
Guess what? Ideally-- in an ideal society-- there's no murder ever! That's impossible to achieve though. But it's still an ideal. See how that works?
That's why these discussions are so stupid.
Me: "Ideally X"
You: "But X will never happen!!!!"
Me: "Well ok. But still ideally X"
It's retarded. I'd prefer that the people who don't understand the concept of an "ideal" simply wouldn't reply.