Maybe it is just me but gosh, the unrelenting rate of change, of the rate of change, in IT is becoming brain frazzling. As soon as I think I have a handle on where things are currently at, along comes some new complex twist; some new turn; some new innovation that threatens to take the status quo and put it through the wood chipper.
I blame the open source phenomenon for that. Now I am using the word "blame" with a great big grin on my face. We are working here in a textual medium so please just picture that in your mind. I am a huge fan of open source but, like any true love, mine is unconditional. I see the faults, but love regardless.
Here is the main "fault" I'm thinking about. The concept of open source and the concept of social software development are closely interlinked. The internet is the communication substrate without which, the open source world could not function effectively. For open source to work, it has to be drop dead easy to consume and to produce. It has to be drop dead easy to communicate: consumer to consumer, consumer to producer, producer to consumer and producer to producer.
The rampant openness results in an amazing phenomenon. Problems that would otherwise be too complex to solve cost effectively, become solvable. Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.
What's not to like? Well, here is what I see happening a lot. Some bug or other manifests itself. Somebody posts the bug details. A wide variety of people chime in. Eventually, a resolution to the problem manifests itself. Everybody moves on. The problem for me is the last bit : "everybody moves on". The sheer power of community communication made the problem soluble. So much so that folks go their separate ways moving on to further problems, without the original problem solution being fully digested, packaged up and assimilated and documented and...
The result, it seems to me, is that we can tolerate a higher threshold of complexity these days in our IT systems thanks to the open source phenomenon. That is good isn't it? Well, yes, except that because we can tolerate it, we do. We don't need to spend time reducing complexity if we can find a way to tolerate it.
It is hot in this kitchen and getting hotter all the time. What to do? Find a way to reduce the heat or leverage the latest asbestos suits? We are mostly doing the latter. There is a universe out there and we are making it more and more complex. With every jump in complexity its as if humankind is saying "Is that all ya got? Bring it on!".
Maybe that is the right strategy.
Maybe it is just me.
Sign up for ITworld's Daily newsletter
Follow ITworld on Twitter @IT_world
jfruh
Apple syncing patent can't come soon enough
pasmith
New Twitter features borrow from 3rd party clients
Esther Schindler
Open Source Changes the Software Acquisition Process
mikelgan
How to set up continuous podcast play on the new iTunes
David Strom
Five important Windows 7 mobility features
sjvn
Guard your Wi-Fi for your own sake
Sandra Henry-Stocker
Grepping on Whole Words
Sidekick: The Good News & the Bad News
Either way you look at it Microsoft Data Center management did not follow standards or best practices in this failure. In which case it makes me wonder more about the outsourcing of corporate data much less personal data.
- mburton325
Join the conversation here
Quick, practical advice for IT pros. Made fresh daily.
Want to cash in on your IT savvy? Send your tip to tips@itworld.com. If we post it, we'll send you a $25 Amazon e-gift card.













I think it is just you
Having also worked on proprietary software, I know that most of the time there is much less effort expended towards understanding the source of a bug than in open source software.Change and complexity are hard to manage, but if we have a way to do so, why not use it? Just look at open source browser envines vs the closed source ones.
Lucian, I suspect that you
Lucian,I suspect that you are right. Nature/fate/accident has found a way to allow us to deal with higher levels of complexity. I'd love to have been in a position to ask Herbert Simon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Simon) his opinion. I remember reading a book of his - The architecture of complexity which argues for hierarchy being the timeless route to complexity management.
The internet is fascinating in that the one thing is most certainly is *not*, is hierarchical!
Sean