[dbshapco]

My experience is the opposite.

The simplest solution is harder and takes longer.

I think easiest or quickest is what is really meant in this formulation, but rarely do either of these result in simplest. I start with the former and strive to iterate towards the latter, because the former starts cheaper but ends up more expensive in the long run.

Simplification is an optimization.

[grandalf]

Perhaps, but businesses are not run on the basis of the long run (unless you are in R&D mode for 10 years), they are one short run after the next.

[jrockway]

I've found this not to be the case. If you write custom applications and they are solid, when it comes time to add a new feature, you can do it quickly and keep the customer happy. If you are riddled with technical debt, the cost of adding a small feature approaches the cost of having a competitor rewrite the whole application.

[grandalf]

I'm not advocating taking on technical debt, just arguing that sometimes the anti technical debt crusade turns into premature optimization and unnecessary concept creep.