Lots of comments here opposed to Martin Fowler's advice. I'm curious if anyone who is anti-Fowler has software design books they _do_ recommend? (Asking because I'd love to read them)
Since the problem usually isn't with the software design advice, but "people read software design books and then try to force whatever they read into their projects", I guess what would make a book "good" for that is "the author isn't popular enough to cause something to be trendy". IMHO Fowlers writing is just fine as "these are things people have done and you might consider" (and what I've read mostly seemed to be written that way, not overly pushy), but its so popular that if he writes about a new thing, too many people then jump onto it as the next big thing, if it matches their problems or not, and that gets painful to work with. Although for Fowler to write about something, I think it already has some trendiness going on and he's not usually on the forefront of new ideas?
People like Martin Fowler or Robert Martin seem to be more famous for the books that they write about software instead of being famous for the software that they write. I don't think it should be possible for somebody to become an authority on software design without them showing their designs to the world. If they work exclusively on proprietary software, then they should provide some other kind of proof that the recommendations that they make are beneficial and demonstrate how helpful they are. E.g. anonymous metrics from their client pool, detailed analyses of various OSS projects, etc.
When e.g. John Carmack talks about a technical topic there's a very long and very public record of the kind of experience that he has. It's reasonable to trust that they are correct, although one should still verify before betting their project/company/career on that piece of advice.
The people that don't like him don't enjoy any books. They just enjoy "getting stuff done." That's really what I find when talking to people about why they don't like concepts that he introduces. They have no alternative, they just don't like people who come across as dogmatic.
detaro|4 years ago
blub|4 years ago
When e.g. John Carmack talks about a technical topic there's a very long and very public record of the kind of experience that he has. It's reasonable to trust that they are correct, although one should still verify before betting their project/company/career on that piece of advice.
amw-zero|4 years ago