Not the author, but I'm a VP of Eng, and one of my sub-orgs is QA. Here's my take...
Aside from writing end-to-end test automation, the best SDETs add value in many other ways. They triage bugs, use their deep product understanding (frequently the best on the team) to refine requirements and build test plans, coordinate bug-bashes and large scale releases, measure and report on quality metrics, and much more. All of this takes considerable load off other members of the team (SWEs, PMs, EMs, etc), allows the whole group to ship with much higher confidence, and increases the number of defects caught before making it to production.
If you have an organization where end-to-end tests are easy to write and very quick to execute, then I think the need for QA folks is greatly reduced. In my experience, once there's enough complexity and scale to a product, it's basically impossible to have a rapid TDD loop with enough end-to-end coverage that allows devs to ship features with perfect confidence. Combine that with all the other "hats" QA folks wear, and I think it's is a role that pays dividends in product quality and the efficiency of others across the org.
I think it’s a good takeaway for something that’s sold once on an app store. If it’s junk, the rankings will tank it, and it may never recover from that. There are a few instances of games that have turned things around after the initial launch, like “No Man’s Sky”, but that’s quite rare.
Take Half-Life as an example. The team realized it wasn’t great after multiple years of development, and ended up essentially rebuilding it over the course of another year or two. To quote Gabe Newell, “Late is just for a little while. Suck is forever.”
Your take is spot on for SaaS apps and enterprise software that’s subscription based: ship early, ship often, and iterate fast.
Or until corporate pulls the plug since it didn't meet the expectations that they had, or you just run out of money if you're on your own, since neither money nor patience are infinite. At least in part, that seemed to happen to: StarCraft: Ghost, Prey 2 (we did get the 2017 release), Half-Life 2: Episode Three, Duke Nukem Forever (the original version), Silent Hills, TimeSplitters 4 and some others.
Edit: to some degree, it seems like the recent KSP2 situation was a case where being late would have definitely been preferable, if not for corporate: https://youtu.be/NtMA594am4M
Also, sometimes you'll do good development work, just for things to go wrong anyways in ways you didn't anticipate, as happened to the launch of Brigador: https://youtu.be/qUsuusNLxik
On the opposite end, since we have early access, many will release the first presentable version of whatever it is that they're working on. The good news is that sometimes customer feedback will shape the final product (as long as the developers actually care). The bad news is that many will buy into the "promise" of the final product, as opposed to what they're actually getting at the time of making the payment and then be disappointed if it doesn't pan out.
I recently learned about The Villages, FL, which is a sprawling retirement community, and was the fastest growing metro area in the US over the past decade [0]. This feels like the perfect bike for an aging demographic living in that sort of community. This sort of e-bike will be less intimidating to use for older people, and ultimately it feels like a good move for the company. It's hard to argue with getting more people outdoors and active on bicycles.
Smaller than The Villages, is Peachtree City outside of Atlanta, which is notable for making off-street micromobility pathways a priority in city planning: (relative to the rest of the suburban US)
> They've rallied around golf carts historically but it's a great place to bike.
Yeah. Having spent a decent amount of time in Florida gated communities, I just don't see electric bikes replacing electric golf carts.
You already have a golf cart and the only thing the bike can do is use a bike lane. Sure somebody who likes to bike might get one just like somebody who likes tennis might get a pickleball set but the average person is just going to get an electric golf cart.
Unless I'm misunderstanding something, I see a possible issue with the experiment setup.
> The start-of-input was measured by pressing two keys at once -- one key on the keyboard and a button that was also connected to the logic analyzer.
In order to get an accurate measurement, wouldn't you need to directly connect the analyzer to circuitry on the underside of a specific key, as well as the USB output, and measure the diff? The article addresses this by mentioning it's only possible to get average latencies with their setup, but I wonder if this is why the keyboard with the shortest measured latency is also one with an extremely low travel distance.
It’s much more egregious with ABNB. A hotel might charge you some small local taxes and fees, but with ABNB you get those plus a whopper of a “cleaning fee”, which can be hundreds of dollars, even for short stays.
The "cleaning fees" on Airbnb are super reminiscent of the the "shipping fees" on early 2000s e-bay. The only difference is that it was a somewhat fresh concept with e-bay. The people who built Airbnb should know better.
Good point! I just stayed at a hotel in hollywood and was charged $20/day "destination charge" and I've had similar resort charges at hotels in hawaii. Hotels are no better than airbnb with these extra fees.
It should be fantastic for towing heavy stuff relatively short distances (less than 150 miles). Electric motors make 100% of their torque from 0 RPM. This is why freight trains are powered by electric motors, with diesel engines merely generating electricity.
For all practical purposes a motor operating at full load under hundreds of RPM is stalled. Motors let out the smoke (or have to throttle back) if you do that too much. The operating speed range of a motor is not infinite. For really high torque applications that also demand high speed you are going to see 2spd gear boxes for the same reasons your power drill has a 2spd gearbox.
While this truck may or may not (I haven't looked at the specs) have a gearbox expect to see trucks with a gearbox (especially as we start seeing electric commercial vehicles). A simple gearbox consisting of two shafts, four gear and a dog clutch or one planetary and a dog clutch is going to be cheaper, lighter and offer less kludgy performance than over-specing the motor.
Aside from writing end-to-end test automation, the best SDETs add value in many other ways. They triage bugs, use their deep product understanding (frequently the best on the team) to refine requirements and build test plans, coordinate bug-bashes and large scale releases, measure and report on quality metrics, and much more. All of this takes considerable load off other members of the team (SWEs, PMs, EMs, etc), allows the whole group to ship with much higher confidence, and increases the number of defects caught before making it to production.
If you have an organization where end-to-end tests are easy to write and very quick to execute, then I think the need for QA folks is greatly reduced. In my experience, once there's enough complexity and scale to a product, it's basically impossible to have a rapid TDD loop with enough end-to-end coverage that allows devs to ship features with perfect confidence. Combine that with all the other "hats" QA folks wear, and I think it's is a role that pays dividends in product quality and the efficiency of others across the org.