[averell]

It's hard to build your consultant image by telling people that multiple methods and tools might work. It's easier to market a simple cure.

Also, the point to "stop making shitty software" is not the same as "stop making mistakes". You can ship high quality software even while being human, it's just slower and more costly.

And while I agree with the article in general, I do believe the current balance has shifted towards too fast iteration and shoddy quality. Just look at the recent iOS/OSX releases. But even that might make business sense, because of the even shittier alternatives.

[icebraining]

> It's hard to build your consultant image by telling people that multiple methods and tools might work. It's easier to market a simple cure.

The thing about these middlebrow dismissals is that they work the other way around:

"It's hard to build your consultant image by telling people that they need self-discipline and rules. It's easier to just sell them on tools that will fix the problem."

[averell]

I just don't think it's likely that the real reason most software is crappy, is because nobody thought of extending unit test coverage yet. Selling tools here is not "the other way", it's the same problem.

What if the problem is bad management? Or low experience/expertise in general? All of these methods and tools are only optimizing locally, and cannot help the root causes.