If coding has been solved, why does software keep getting worse?
This article provocatively questions why software continues to decline in quality despite advancements, suggesting that a focus on rapid feature delivery and misaligned incentives are to blame. Hacker News widely concurs, sharing a litany of personal frustrations ranging from focus-stealing UIs to buggy mobile apps. The discussion delves into how managerial pressures, developer incentives, and AI's amplification of
The Lowdown
The article "If coding has been solved, why does software keep getting worse?" posits that despite significant progress in coding tools and methodologies, including the advent of AI, the overall quality of software is deteriorating. The author illustrates this with common frustrations like unresponsive applications, focus-stealing UIs, and perpetual bugs, arguing that these issues are not random but systemic. The core contention is that while the capability to code has advanced, the incentives and priorities driving software development have shifted away from user experience and robust engineering.
- The article highlights pervasive software annoyances, such as Slack on macOS stealing focus, buggy car infotainment systems, and frustrating banking apps, as evidence of declining quality.
- It suggests that management's obsession with speed, feature velocity, and "Minimum Viable Products" (MVPs) often leads to neglecting bug fixes and quality, creating a cycle of technical debt.
- The author argues that AI, rather than improving quality, may be accelerating the production of low-quality code by empowering less skilled developers and encouraging a disregard for rigorous standards.
- A significant point is made about the "enshittification" of software, where products are designed more for investor value or internal metrics than for genuine user benefit, leading to dark patterns and exploitative features.
- The piece laments the lack of user trust, as updates are now often met with dread rather than excitement, anticipating new problems rather than improvements.
In essence, the article concludes that the perceived "solving" of coding refers merely to the ease of production, not the elevation of quality, and that current industry trends prioritize output and profit over user satisfaction and software integrity.
The Gossip
Daily Digital Dread
Many commenters immediately resonated with the article's premise, sharing a litany of frustrations with everyday software. Common gripes included macOS apps stealing focus, slow Electron apps like Slack, buggy mobile apps (Reddit on iOS was a frequent target), and the general feeling that updates make things worse. This sentiment of "enshittification" and a loss of user control over their devices was a strong recurring theme.
Managerial Malpractice & Misaligned Motives
The community largely attributed the decline in software quality not to coding being "solved" or AI itself, but to deeper systemic issues. Key culprits identified were management's relentless pursuit of speed over quality, "MVPitis" leading to perpetually buggy products, product owners prioritizing features for green status reports, and a lack of incentives for developers to prioritize craftsmanship. Some argued the exponential growth of less experienced programmers and the increasing complexity of distributed systems also contribute.
AI's Accelerated Ailments
While acknowledging pre-existing issues, many agreed that AI is accelerating the problem rather than causing it. The argument is that AI acts as a "force multiplier," allowing less skilled developers to produce "slop" at a higher volume. It's seen as the "private equity of software," making the easy 80% trivial and the hard 20% impossible, leading to a further neglect of quality. Some, however, dismissed the AI connection, stating software quality was declining long before AI became prevalent.
Past Perils, Present Progress?
A minority view argued that software has always been imperfect, and comparing modern software to simpler past versions is unfair due to increased complexity. One commenter passionately defended modern software achievements, citing reliable cloud storage, advanced chip design (Apple Silicon), and global 5G rollouts as examples of successful, high-quality engineering. This contrasted sharply with the prevailing sentiment of decline.
FOSS for the Frustrated
Several commenters suggested turning to Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), particularly Linux desktop environments like KDE or XFCE, as a refuge from the commercial software treadmill. They praised FOSS for its stability, user control, and community-driven focus on solving actual user problems rather than chasing commercial metrics. The discussion also included advice and experiences with Linux distributions for gaming and daily use.
Distro Drama: DHH's Divisive Distro
A significant tangent emerged around "Omarchy," a Linux distribution mentioned briefly in the article. Commenters quickly pointed out its creator, David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH), and his recent controversial "alt-right" political views. This led to a heated debate about the ethics of supporting projects by individuals with problematic ideologies, with some questioning the definition of "fascist" and others providing links to DHH's controversial blog posts.