> never shipped traditional commercial software as a product (which is definitely a dying breed).
And why might that be? Isn't it because people realized they make way more money charging for PoCs shipped in a week than "products" polished over several years?
Nobody cares what your engineering methodology is like if it doesn't print money.
It is a good thing. Even shitty software was underpriced back then. Developers and tech companies deserve massive ROI for the work they do. In an alternative world the Linux Foundation would have become the first trillion dollar company.
The fact that shitty software companies are raising massive valuations now should signal that the actual, real useful software companies are massively undervalued.
And why might that be? Isn't it because people realized they make way more money charging for PoCs shipped in a week than "products" polished over several years?
Nobody cares what your engineering methodology is like if it doesn't print money.