Wallace B. McClure

All About Wally McClure - The musings of Wallym on Web, HTML5, Mobile, Xamarin.iOS, Xamarin.Android, and Windows Azure.

  • Stockholm Syndrome of Software

    I've talked about how customers get so attached to failed code, trying to save some form of cost from a failed software project and unwilling to part with the disaster, that I've come up with a term for it.  I refer to it as the "Stockholm Syndrome of Software."  The basic idea is that customers get so attached to failed software projects, they will try to do anything to save the investment, including trying to sprinkle a new software project with failed pieces of software.

    It is understandable.  On the surface, this makes sense.  Surely somewhere in this pile of code, there is something that it makes sense to keep. Or, another view of it is that we, the company, can just throw out the old developers, bring some newer/better developers in to solve our problems.  These new developers, all they need to do is to cut the head off of a live chicken, perform a voodoo dance around a keyboard, presto changeo, and we have a fully running system.

    This is a nightmare.  The code failed for a reason.  If the previous set of developers didn't know what they were doing, why do you think the architecture that they started is worth a damn?  Why run on top of the old software?  Why would you want to infect good code with bad?

    Sorry folks, software that doesn't work and never reached the level of being acceptable for use by being deployed is not really suitable for use.  Instead of spending good money on top of bad and trying to keep software on life support that should be shot, go ahead and admit that the software is a sunk cost.  Throw the non working code away.  Get a set of developers that are trustworthy and can deliver.  Don't micromanage them.  Don't tell them to just put a few tweaks on the non working code.  Don't cling to the old code, trust me, you will be better off.

    I find that this problem is rampant.  Everyone thinks that they can save a few bucks by going the cheap route.  The cheap route doesn't tend to work.  The cheap route costs more with software that doesn't quite work.  It fails in weird places.  It craps out with 5 users.  It does all the wrong stuff at the wrong time.  Trust me, you are better off without cheap, crappy code.  Let it go, and do it right.

  • Startup Posts

    I wanted to tie together a few of my startup articles designed for developers and to put them into one place where I can access them.  Here are my articles from Visual Studio Magazine over the past few years.

  • Our Golf App

    I wanted to share my feeling at watching the scoreboards on Sunday February 18th, 2018.  It is awesome to know that I’ve built a system that people can use and I don’t have to be around to see.  It’s hard when things start.  Your goal when you start is not to have everything perfect.  Your goal is to have something that people can use initially.  It’s not perfect.  It is a start.  Initially, it is called a Minimum Viable Product.  Minimum is the key.  You start with the minimum set of features that people can use.  Over time, you add features.  You improve the product.  That is called iteration.  And that is what I have done.  I have taken a product that I had to go to the golf course to run to now, the golf assistant procs can run the application with no interaction from me.  For the club games, we have things to the point where a golf pro just needs to:

  • Startup Posts

    I wanted to tie together a few of my startup articles designed for developers and to put them into one place where I can access them.  Here are my articles from Visual Studio Magazine over the past few years.