Driving engineers to an arbitrary date is a value destroying mistake (2020)
The problem that the article doesn't address is that users don't actually seem to mind using <i>terrible</i> software so long as it solves the problem they face better than not using it. I could list literally hundreds of half-assed, broken, bloated applications that I've encountered in the past 25 years that have done very well simply because they <i>kind of</i> solve a problem <i>a bit</i> for the user.<p>Pushing out something <i>completely</i> broken that doesn't do what it's supposed to is definitely not going to work (duh!). Pushing out an app that solves the problem of managing shopping lists that has a bug where it doesn't work given a particular set of circumstances will still lead to <i>many</i> people using it if the users don't have any alternatives and it's better than using a piece of paper.<p>Software quality is important to companies because it means that they can spend more time building features instead of fighting fires, and because low quality represents a threat that a competitor could launch a better, less buggy app. Users mostly don't care so long as the app works well enough to do what they need it to do (but they're not dumb, they'll still pick the least buggy option if there are alternatives..).<p>A high level of quality in software is not important unless you're entering an already well-served market. I wish it was.