Skip to main content

Imaginations Run Wild

One day, several years ago, I was eating dinner with some Chinese new friends in a small, Chinese restaurant in Flushing, NY. After the food was gone, I turned to Jeff who was sitting next to me and watched him eat the rest of his bowl of rice by itself.

The young, philosophical me had a picture in my head. I could see the women in their bamboo hats, ankle deep in the mud of the rice fields. So I asked him at that point, "are you eating the rice because it symbolizes the hard work of the laborers in the fields and you don't want to waste it?"

Jeff assessed my mental state for a few moments, then resumed eating his rice. It turns out he was just hungry, and plain rice was better than no rice.

Elegance is...well...elegant. It's nice to devise a solution to a problem that you feel would qualify for a place in the Museum of Modern Art, but sometimes the best solution is the easiest. We know this as the Keep It Simple, Stupid or KISS principle.

(For the astute reader, this posting is different than another one that I wrote using KISS as the premise for the discussion.)

So why am I writing about a topic with which we are all familiar? (I wonder what the rice workers would give as an answer.) I'm sure we've seen situations where such emphasis is placed on developing an elaborate solution that it paralyzes the team. The final solution isn't started, much less finished, until well after something simpler could have been implemented and the rewards realized. Therefore, it's worth reminding ourselves that frequently simplicity is best even if it means that it may only address 95% of the requirements for a solution.

For example, my family and I are currently preparing for a move from Long Island, New York to New Jersey. We have a small apartment now, but it still needs to be packed. During the time that we've lived here, we've managed to accumulate a fair amount of small "stuff" (with a nod to George Carlin). Given that moving companies have a reputation (unfairly attributed, I'm sure) to manhandling one's possessions, we could organize everything in the boxes neatly and wrap everything up in bubble wrap to ensure its safety.

What would that accomplish? Honestly, it would do nothing but waste a substantial amount of our time. Instead, we have recognized that a lot of our smaller possessions would not be missed (much) even if they were pulverized. Therefore, we are simply putting things in boxes without much regard to organization with the recognition that the odds are greatly in our favor that nothing will get damaged.

Does the story of the tortoise and hare ring a bell? In this instance, however, the hare wins. Steady persistence (the tortoise) in one's efforts to find the best solution have more potential in terms of benefits provided, but (to paraphrase a basketball coach whose name escapes me) "potential means you ain't done shit for me lately."

On an unrelated note, I get asked somewhat regularly where I get my graphics from for the blog. I use an amazing site, full of free and royalty photographs: stock.xchng. Unfortunately, they are having stability issues at the time of this writing for the first time since I started using them, which is why there is no spiffy graphic in this installment.

See you next week.

Popular posts from this blog

"Ni jiang yi yang de hua ma?"

Last week, I wrote about the necessity of having a clear message . Because this topic is so important I decided to follow-up with another entry on this general subject. This week we will approach it from another angle. (For the curious, the title says " Do you speak the same language? " in pinyin, which is a transliterated Mandarin Chinese.) Recently, a good friend of mine (who is Chinese, ironically) and I were playing pool. He had to bank the 8-ball in the pocket to win the game, and since it was an informal game and bank shots are my area of expertise, he asked me for advice. I told him, "you just need to strike the cue ball with medium speed so that it hits the 8-ball right in the middle." He didn't believe me so we marked the positions of the balls, and then he took his shot only to watch the 8-ball sail past the pocket. "A-ha!" he exclaimed. "I told you it wasn't that easy." But when we reset the positions and I made an attemp

It's Easier to Fail at DevOps than it is to Succeed

Slippery when wet Since the term DevOps was coined in Belgium back in 2009, it is impossible to avoid the term whether in discussions with colleagues or in professional trade magazines.  And during the years while this movement has gained momentum, many things have been written to describe what elements of a DevOps strategy are required for it to be successful. Yet in spite of this, there is an interesting data point worth noting: not many organizations feel there is a need for DevOps.  In a Gartner report entitled DevOps Adoption Survey Results (published in September 2015),  40%  of respondents said they had no plans to implement DevOps and 31% of respondents said they hadn't implemented it but planned to start in the 12 months after the survey was conducted. That left only 29% who had implemented DevOps in a pilot project or in production systems, which isn't a lot. "Maybe it's because there truly isn't a need for DevOps," you say.  While that

Is No/Low-Code the Key to IT Nirvana?

 Unless you've had your head in the sand for the past year or so, you've seen the phrases low-code  and no-code  bandied about quite frequently everywhere you look.  You've probably wondered if this is something new that's here to stay or just a "flash in the pan."  Although the terms have been in the fore of the IT trade publications recently, Low Code Development Platforms (LCDP) (and the corresponding No Code Development Platforms) have been in existence since 2011.  Their roots can be traced to the 90's with 4th generation programming languages and GUI-assisted programming paradigms, e.g. IBM VisualAge for Basic, which was discontinued in 1998. For those of you who aren't familiar with either, the premise is that these platforms allow someone to quickly build applications using a WYSIWYG interface and a "click and configure" paradigm to Isn't this the source code to Roblox? rapidly build full applications with little or no coding requ