That's a good point, I think I'd just heard that a long time ago and not really thought about it but with much larger features it should actually be more resilient.
This is so true. Highly efficient systems can be fragile. If one part breaks down, the whole is affected. The system needs a bit of slack to be able to handle the unexpected. It's been a while since I read it, but I think the book Slack by Tom DeMarco argues this.
Another way to think of it might be that it can be relied on - until it can't. Be ready and wary of that happening, but until then you have what's probably a good mitigation of the problem.
"Disrepair" is a strong word. There are problems, but most of the time, it runs smoothly for me. It's an enormous piece of infrastructure that mostly works. That's no small feat.
To a degree. But, on the same token, large enterprises, especially financial, typically value stability and are risk averse when it comes to core infrastructure. So, yeah, you don't always get the latest shiny things.
But unfortunately, you can never be sure that if a thing is expensive, it is reliable. It's a little difficult to find reliable things in today's market, but it's posible.
reply