|
Sander Rossel wrote: I never understood these rewrites that should basically produce the exact same application
It usually comes down to "training issues". If you do a rewrite that maintains the same general look and feel, the user base is more accepting.
We're trying to get permission to do a rewrite, and the only thing that changes for the user is a minimal appearance changes, including better layout practices, fluid design, color changes, and small menu changes). The REAL changes involve the code that makes it happen. We're suffering from bad architectural decisions in the front end, and terrible schema decisions in the database. Our code base is over 10 years old and base on ASP.Net Web Forms, and the last time we updated jquery was 2013.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
That's a hard sale, we're going to spend $$$, but you won't notice a thing.
And your employer should hope you won't make the same mistakes you made over 10 years ago 
I totally understand that development can get very expensive and even come to a grinding halt if your code base is a mess and that it may be cheaper to do a rewrite.
It's a very difficult situation to be in 
|
|
|
|
|
The tangible difference is theoretical - significantly less effort in terms of maintenance (which is ironically where most devs spend their time in existing apps).
"Yes, we're going to spend time rewriting it, but if we do it right, nobody will notice a difference in the app itself."
Everybody on the team agrees that it needs to be done (the code base started in 2008/2009), and the code has have more than two dozen contractors work on it since then.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Now you have two systems to maintain.
|
|
|
|
|
Luckily no.
We've switched off the old systems now, it's clients moaning about us [me] changing things.
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: The ticket has been reopened as "the user doesn't want to change their workflow"...
The solution to this problem is to provide some new functionality that can only be accomplished by following the new workflow.
If pigs could fly, just imagine how good their wings would taste!
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
wouldn't an easier, cheaper solution be to (perhaps threaten) to fire the user?
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Been there, done that.
I have been working on modernizing a few legacy applications.
It always ends up in battle with the users.
I have heard every reason to want not to use the new system:
. Not enough color. (Some users want the application to look like a clown on crack)
. Too much color.
. Not our company colors. (Yeah, green text on a pink background)
. Too many entry fields.
. Missing entry fields (Like anyone has a telex today....)
. Things are in the wrong place/order.
. Etc.
Sometimes, the users don't want to upgrade and are staying on the old version.
Sometimes, they go to another company that promises to build what they want. (not what they need)
Quite often we have no choice because of governmental rules.
But most of the time it comes down to poor communication.
Users are like little children, you need to explain it in simple term, and repeat it over and over again.
You NEED to get the users involved BEFORE you start coding the new system. Give them the idea that they are in control, but in the meantime, you are slowly and gently steering them in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: You NEED to get the users involved BEFORE you start coding the new system. Give them the idea that they are in control,
They just might have ideas on improving the system -- frequently the decision-makers (a.k.a. their bosses) have no clue about any of the current work flow impediments, or the work-arounds that are just part of what the users "have to do" to get their old system to support their work.
|
|
|
|
|
Terrible thing, but...
I discovered this interwonenness (is that a word at all?) about 35 years ago.
There is no way to tell users to change their habits from a programming chair and all sorts of less palatable motives might be involved (only at the userside, of course...).
You need to (re)formalize a (set of) workflows before you can expect acceptance, because even if there is no spontaneous acceptance, you can now enforce it.
|
|
|
|
|
I once had a manger put a 6 inch thick binder of my desk.
It was the code and documentation for a system I was supposed to replace.
I went straight to the users and asked them what they needed.
The program was a success.
I never did open that binder.
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: The ticket has been reopened as "the user doesn't want to change their workflow"...
In my experience, you should always question the "game of telephone" between yourself and 'the user'".
In an organization of even a meager size, especially if there are multiple "support groups" in "multiple organizations" between the end user and the "developer/product designer", then both ends have a good chance of getting bad information. The end user and the developer/designer typically understand the nitty gritty details of the job, issues, and potential solutions and everyone else has a skin deep understanding. That lack of in depth knowledge causes the links in the telephone chain to miscommunication information and insert their own ignorant perspective to "help" the situation along having no idea the damage they are causing. Then again, your project is just one of 10 those "helpers" with skin deep knowledge are probably handling and can't justify the time to get the in depth knowledge you can.
|
|
|
|
|
Today's brilliant code/design is tomorrow's bad design.
They don't pay you because it's fun, they pay you to get it done their way. 
Get over it. 
Wear a mask. the life you save may be your own.
|
|
|
|
|
Pig and zebra make tangles with uniforms (9)
|
|
|
|
|
I can not do the CCC Monday, but surely this one can not go unanswered? Get your answer in, don't be late!
|
|
|
|
|
I can not do the CC today, let alone Monday ... the best I can come up with is UNGULATES, and that only fits the start!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
On second thoughts, maybe I do ...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Pig and zebra
make (Anag)
tangles NG LATES
with uniforms U U
UNGULATES
Why "U" is "Uniform" I have no idea...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
That's what I got, so I do hope it is right 
U is Uniform in the NATO Phonetic Alphabet.
|
|
|
|
|
Phonetic alphabet ?
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Correct on all counts! I knew I could depend on you...
What I learnt (in checking for this clue) is that there are marine ungulates too, including dolphins... but I thought using a dolphin as an example of a hoofed mammal would be just a tad too confusing!! 
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't know that either, but I guess it makes sense: they evolved from some hoofed creature even if they don't have the defining characteristic any more.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
It's finally dawned on me this afternoon that I should have simplified this to
Two ewes in tangles
But would you have got it from that?
|
|
|
|
|
Ewes would then do double duty (definition and something to decode as part of an anagram), but I like it.
|
|
|
|
|
She asked me: "What's this?"
I said: "It's a tree."
"Really?"
"In a nutshell, yeah."
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
