Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
BigBoo3278137dBad is subjective.
Depends on what your values are.
Is the software supposed to be there indefinitely?
Is it being replaced on a regular basis?
Are there deadlines? How long are they?
There are just so many questions you have to answer.
Think about what types of customers your company has.
Try to evaluate if your practices is profitable for your company.
Do you have another idea for being more profitable?
- Yes, the software is supposed to be there indefinitely
- I'm not sure what you mean by 'replaced', but it's basically always the same frontend with a changing backend
- The deadlines are two months per release
- The types of customers are technology-ignorant people who want efficiency and who are very time-pressured
I don't think the practices are profitable because they mess up more than they fix things. Our clients consistently complain about our platform.
The more profitable way to go would be to choose a better stack and to focus on quality and robustness.
InterferenceObj1711137dIn my opinion, yes. I favour quality over quantity when it comes to development. There is already enough poorly developed products out there. No need to contribute to the problem
CodeMasterAlex913136dThe stream of quick fixes wouldn't be necessary if the quality was good. Better quality will save costs, get you a happier customer and generate more revenue. And much more. But that's my experience. And it does cost to get to high quality. I would say that the company is not very good.
They should strive for quality and give developers room and what they need to achieve high quality.
They're probably also not working Scrum, right?
Your Job Suck?
Take a quick quiz from Triplebyte to skip the job search hassles and jump to final interviews at hot tech firms
Get a Better Job