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?
“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?