[FpUser]

Example - I have JSON based RPC so that systems from other vendors can talk to mine (enterprise backends written in C++). It works like a charm and has ben doing so for years. Here comes this architecture astronaut and tells ma that I should do GraphQL and proceeds to explain me how powerful and cool it is and how everybody and his cat uses it. So on the downside I will waste a gobbles of time and money, on upside - zilch because nobody gives a shit. The problem is already solved for us year ago so buzz off. And that guy could not give a single example of how it can help me. Just spreading FUD about existing things.

There are numerous opposite examples when I see that this new tech, lib, tool actually saves me time and money. I pay quite a few dollars for software tooling. Well if the tool does not offer perpetual license it is a no go for me then.

This is all that matters to me. On desktop for example I skipped moving to that .NET bandwagon and stayed with Delphi for my GUI desktop products. They worked 20 years ago and they work the same now. Single 10MB self updating exe with zero deployment issue. And free from numerous limitations imposed by UWP. Competitor is 1GB package with crapload of problems and every update turns a nightmare for customers. In my case all the time is spent creative stuff that brings me new customers / money instead of feeding someone else. Sure it costs me few hundred a year but that is peanuts.

[hzlatar]

Thank you for taking the time to answer. You sound like a good rational engineer. Things that work don't need unnecessary splash of coolness.

On my previous job, I had been working for 15 years on the development of a complex business system. It included desktop apps, mobile apps, webs, on-premises and clouds. Throughout the years, we have introduced many then cutting-edge technologies for new products within the system. Some technologies before they were cool. But, the fine-working-already-done products, we kept supporting with the original technology for the lifetime of the product.

The point is that many new tools and technologies bring a very limited value to the finished working products.

Now, I am a maker of the new development tools. So, I am eager to push them to the world, but wouldn't like to be perceived as an "architecture astronaut". Your opinion helps in understanding how and why engineers choose new tools and technologies.

[FpUser]

"Coolness" is not in what I use inside my product but how "cool" customers think it is because of features, robustness, price etc. It feels very "cool" to me when my products work and serve customers.

>"Now, I am a maker of the new development tools."

This is a part where I spend money. Good tools are very valuable as they directly save me time / money.

>"The point is that many new tools and technologies bring a very limited value to the finished working products."

Even for new ones. For example my servers are modern C++. In theory I should be using Rust / Go for new ones if I listen to a chorus. Guess what modern C++ works just fine for me and produces stellar results hence no reason for me to switch. I do some toy projects with new languages / tech to get a grip and be aware just in case.