Feedback: This link would be a lot more useful if it had any concrete context or commentary related to the link. “A common fallacy among programmer-types” could be anything, not even related to programming, and the link title is even more vague. I clicked on it only to realize I’d already read it several years ago.
That sentence means “You can lose a lot of market-share by not releasing any improved versions of your product for three years”.
You are (I think) taking it to mean “Anything written about the Internet world becomes valueless after three years”.
These seem to me to be more or less unrelated propositions, and it certainly isn’t obvious to me that anything in Spolsky’s article is wrong. If there are things in it for which you reckon strong contrary evidence has come in since 2000, perhaps you might say what they are and sketch (or link to) that strong contrary evidence?
Feedback: This link would be a lot more useful if it had any concrete context or commentary related to the link. “A common fallacy among programmer-types” could be anything, not even related to programming, and the link title is even more vague. I clicked on it only to realize I’d already read it several years ago.
“Three years is an awfully long time in the Internet world.”
Publication date: April 6, 2000
I think the content of this article is a good recommendation against this article.
That sentence means “You can lose a lot of market-share by not releasing any improved versions of your product for three years”.
You are (I think) taking it to mean “Anything written about the Internet world becomes valueless after three years”.
These seem to me to be more or less unrelated propositions, and it certainly isn’t obvious to me that anything in Spolsky’s article is wrong. If there are things in it for which you reckon strong contrary evidence has come in since 2000, perhaps you might say what they are and sketch (or link to) that strong contrary evidence?