About three years ago, during one of the Balasys Blackowl discussions, we were laughing about how strange it would be to have to patch your fridge every day. When you unpack a new fridge, you can be sure it will work for years, and at most you'll have to change the light bulb. With software, though, we take it for granted that updates, fixes and hotfixes arrive every week.
A fair question: is the software industry really of lower quality than any other industry?
Why do we perceive software quality as low?
When you unpack a new fridge, you can be sure it will work flawlessly for a long time - perhaps the light will need fixing. Software, by contrast, constantly receives updates and fixes. Many people conclude from this that software quality is worse than that of traditional manufactured goods. But is that really so?
Software development hides enormous complexity:
· applications integrate with numerous systems and hardware, and have to fit into an extremely complex ecosystem
· user needs and the surrounding environment change quickly,
· and security risks keep growing.
That is why software is a "living" product - it constantly evolves, fixes defects and responds to change with new features. This dynamic is a sign of maintenance, not necessarily of poor code quality.
Why are there so many patches?
- Fast market pressure - competition means companies often release a working but imperfect product and then fix it.
- Security threats - the cybersecurity landscape keeps changing, so new vulnerabilities are always emerging.
- Compatibility - new browsers, new hardware and new integrations mean software has to adapt constantly.
- Agile development - modern development methods (Scrum, DevOps) encourage teams to work in fast iterations, which naturally results in many small releases.
Poor quality = lots of patches?
In my view, not necessarily - quite the opposite. Frequent updates aren't always a sign of poor quality; often they prove the software is "alive", evolving and responding to user feedback and changes in its environment.
Put another way: an application that works flawlessly but hasn't been updated for years is more suspicious today than a product that is regularly maintained and fixed.
Of course, it would be hard to claim everything is fine with quality in IT development. It is no accident that quality assurance is one of the fastest-developing areas of IT. Methods are changing, and new technology solutions - including automated ones - keep arriving.
What can IT companies do to improve code quality?
We will devote a separate article to methods for improving code quality, but here are the most important points in brief:
The most important is good design - nothing replaces it, and I mean functional design too
A structured code review process
Automated code analysis tools (integrity, standards violations)
Testing, of course (unit and functional tests)
Well-functioning CI/CD processes
Modular design (breaking code into smaller parts)
Knowledge sharing and documentation (what a surprise)
We will write about these in detail in a future article.
What do you think? Do frequent fixes point to poor quality, or to continuous improvement? And what further steps would you like to see to improve code quality?
