It's certainly annoyance - and a good amount of it - but cool doesn't come into it. What I'm really railing against is people who talk a good game but seem to be incapable of delivering anything but bad software (regardless of whether what it does is supposed to be "cool", whatever that might mean when taken in context), and includes unreliable.

I have to admit that it may not be entirely they're fault: organisational culture shapes you whether you want it to or not. So perhaps what I'm really railing against is a culture of software development that tends to exist in larger organisations.

Clearly this isn't universal though - just common. There are notable examples where very large organisations have been able to avoid these problems, at least for a while, even at scale: Google, BBC, parts of Microsoft (I can personally attest to this one), facebook (although hearing from a friend t sounds like they're getting sucked into it).

I do find it frustrating that guys like this style themselves as thought-leaders - and often succeed - whilst unfailingly focussing on the wrong points, and making themselves a complete pain in the ass to everyone they work with.

The other point is that as I've got older it's become starkly obvious to me that I only have so much time left. Obviously that's always been true but when I was younger I suppose I just didn't take it that seriously, and that's sort of a gentle regret. And that's really for everyone: you don't have all the time in the world so if there's something you want to do then get on and do it - sometimes you have to do things just to make ends meet but, as far as is possible, don't subject yourself to anyone who's going to hinder you on that journey.

if you make a game, you make a playable proto-type first. And that proto-type must be fun. Period. Can be horri-bad in every other aspect. Can be even bad regarding the architecture years after you went to market. Notch, we are still looking at you here! And if the game is fun- it will still sell. If Tech would attack that core-value, then changes are very much in order - but building the perfect system, before you know the game you do it for is fun- that is creating blueprintporn, with no value for the players.

> you probably don't want to be spending your time figuring out why "the time between ticks increased to 20-30 ms and then it dropped again.

When I was in mobile games (3D) we saw a direct correlation between framerate and revenue. We released a patch that (accidentally) slashed the frame rate and our revenue tanked. We released a patch that did nothing but fix the performance and our revenue went back up to previous amounts.

Businessvalue-only code can get complex though, and difficult to work with. But, maybe, when the value/intention is clear, it makes it easier to understand. (That is, until there's years of accumulated complexity).