I'm all with Antirez here

> Yes, business decision of time and money. When everybody says that you're losing money and time by providing better service, and lower quality is OK, management will jump on it, because, monies. Often that "saving money" is just externalizing the cost onto your users. Especially in mobile development. Instead of putting in the tiny amount of effort it takes to continue support for older devices, developers just increase the minimum required OS version, telling users with older hardware to fuck off or buy a new phone. Another example is when you don't take the time to properly optimize your code, you're offloading that cost onto the user in the form of unnecessarily higher system requirements.

> I'm all with Antirez here. Software came here, because we developed the software just for the sake of it, and evolved it to production ready where needed. Not the other way around (Case in point: Linux). Growing up in the 80s and 90s I understand viscerally how you feel, but this take strikes me as willfully ignorant of the history of computers, and the capitalist incentives that were necessary for their creation. The first computer and the internet itself were funded by the military. The PC wouldn't have existed if mainframes hadn't proved the business value in order to drive costs down to the point the PC was viable. Even the foundational ideas that led to computers couldn't exist with funding—Charles Babbage's father was a London banker. I think a lot of what you are reacting to is the failed promise of free software and the rise of the internet, when the culture was still heavily …