1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,140
Well, it's the time of year that the forecasts come out from all the big shops.

2
00:00:04,840 --> 00:00:09,320
I haven't gone to see what IDC's enterprise—well, let me back up.

3
00:00:09,400 --> 00:00:12,720
I think it's all IT spending that they come out with because it's in the trillions,

4
00:00:12,820 --> 00:00:14,440
which means it includes consumer spending.

5
00:00:14,820 --> 00:00:19,280
I don't know if it includes gaming, but it probably includes Apple.

6
00:00:19,280 --> 00:00:23,180
As always, if you took Apple out, maybe you would have the IT spending for the year.

7
00:00:25,340 --> 00:00:30,000
I was listening to a podcast going over, like, of course, like, you know, chip supply chain stuff,

8
00:00:30,040 --> 00:00:34,080
and Apple comes up, and I'm always reminded, like, that, wow, that is amazing.

9
00:00:34,500 --> 00:00:39,780
They make so much money, and they're such an integral part of society.

10
00:00:40,000 --> 00:00:44,520
Anyhow, Gartner and Forrester, I haven't checked IDC, and I don't know.

11
00:00:44,520 --> 00:00:46,820
What are the other ones, Ed, Canalysis or something?

12
00:00:47,140 --> 00:00:48,880
There's about five or six, like—

13
00:00:48,880 --> 00:00:50,140
Asparagingly, maybe, some of them.

14
00:00:50,420 --> 00:00:51,680
Yeah, yes, forecasts.

15
00:00:51,940 --> 00:00:57,900
But it looks like—let me start, as always, with our concerns, fellas.

16
00:00:58,140 --> 00:01:01,760
And it looks like in the software and cloud and cloud services business,

17
00:01:01,960 --> 00:01:05,180
we're looking at about, like, it is a decrease from earlier forecasts,

18
00:01:05,620 --> 00:01:10,980
but we've got about a five—not about, way too precise—a 5.1% growth rate

19
00:01:10,980 --> 00:01:14,240
in spending ahead for us in this year.

20
00:01:14,240 --> 00:01:15,940
I think it's CY 2023.

21
00:01:16,400 --> 00:01:18,840
We're not looking at an FY, which is fine.

22
00:01:18,920 --> 00:01:23,400
So you might need to load up the spreadsheets and adjust it if you're on some sort of, like, present company.

23
00:01:23,400 --> 00:01:24,580
No, I can do calendar years.

24
00:01:24,680 --> 00:01:26,600
Financial years are so much harder to keep in my head.

25
00:01:26,880 --> 00:01:27,160
Indeed.

26
00:01:27,160 --> 00:01:27,940
Because they're normally the wrong one.

27
00:01:28,400 --> 00:01:33,740
And so it looks like—so their estimate is there's going to be $4.5 trillion of—

28
00:01:33,740 --> 00:01:36,880
I think this is, as I like to joke, I think this is terrestrial spend.

29
00:01:37,260 --> 00:01:41,380
I don't know if the secret world of low-Earth orbit and Moon and Mars colonies,

30
00:01:41,560 --> 00:01:42,720
if this is included in it.

31
00:01:42,860 --> 00:01:48,960
So we've got $4.5 trillion of terrestrial spend, which is a 2.4 increase from last year.

32
00:01:49,120 --> 00:01:50,360
Again, I think it's calendar year.

33
00:01:51,060 --> 00:01:57,200
And it looks like this quarter is—anyways, I get all this stuff mixed up because who cares.

34
00:01:57,700 --> 00:02:01,980
But, like, in the segment that we're in, we've got 5, 5.5% growth.

35
00:02:02,160 --> 00:02:08,260
So as people like to joke from the lovely show Arrested Development, there's always money in the banana stand.

36
00:02:09,640 --> 00:02:14,720
Whatever may be going on in the economy, software tends to be a good, bright spot.

37
00:02:14,720 --> 00:02:18,440
Because, after all, if times are good or bad, you need computers.

38
00:02:19,120 --> 00:02:20,800
It's always a requirement.

39
00:02:20,940 --> 00:02:25,440
Things will be a lot worse if you don't have computers, is my general finding.

40
00:02:25,500 --> 00:02:29,980
Except when it comes to, you know, your own self-mental health.

41
00:02:30,040 --> 00:02:35,300
However, that's a topic maybe we should discuss at some other point, is, like, I always imagine myself, you know,

42
00:02:35,520 --> 00:02:38,060
trying to encourage my kids to spend less time on the screen.

43
00:02:38,240 --> 00:02:41,860
But it's really interrupting the time I'm spending with my phone to manage that.

44
00:02:43,620 --> 00:02:48,340
I was going to say, that trillion in gaming, I feel like I contributed heavily to that,

45
00:02:48,420 --> 00:02:51,020
trying to buy Fortnite V-Bucks this Christmas for my kids.

46
00:02:51,280 --> 00:02:51,720
Ah, yes.

47
00:02:51,720 --> 00:02:53,280
Yes, we're obviously in the same space there.

48
00:02:53,980 --> 00:02:57,740
So, what are you, you know, you're always scanning the news out there, listening to the wires,

49
00:02:57,840 --> 00:03:02,620
like that guy in heat, you know, up in the camper, as you would say, on the mountaintop.

50
00:03:02,780 --> 00:03:08,200
What are you seeing as far as the forecast and the spending, you know, at the moment,

51
00:03:08,360 --> 00:03:12,360
in the past, like, 60-day moving window of buzz?

52
00:03:12,380 --> 00:03:12,900
60 days.

53
00:03:12,980 --> 00:03:13,580
Was it within that?

54
00:03:13,660 --> 00:03:13,880
I'm not.

55
00:03:13,980 --> 00:03:14,320
Probably.

56
00:03:15,060 --> 00:03:15,900
I mean, much the same, right?

57
00:03:16,000 --> 00:03:19,940
You've either got the doom-mongers saying everything's going down, even the cloud providers,

58
00:03:20,120 --> 00:03:23,900
you know, are seeing a slowdown, hence all these layoffs, all that kind of stuff.

59
00:03:24,840 --> 00:03:25,760
There's some analysis.

60
00:03:25,920 --> 00:03:26,660
Who was it, Bernard Golden?

61
00:03:26,700 --> 00:03:29,380
I think we talked about before, I mentioned before, maybe name-dropped, whichever,

62
00:03:29,920 --> 00:03:33,440
pointing out the underlying growth for them was still going up.

63
00:03:33,460 --> 00:03:38,740
And I think we all still feel that, that it's still, like I said, software's still a good place to be.

64
00:03:38,820 --> 00:03:42,980
It might not be as good as it was a year, a year or two ago, but it's still a good place to be.

65
00:03:43,220 --> 00:03:47,080
I think you only have to look at, you know, again, the chat GPT kind of stuff, right?

66
00:03:47,180 --> 00:03:50,640
It's very easy software to just suddenly everyone go, wow, that's a cool new thing.

67
00:03:51,240 --> 00:03:52,760
And that has dollars attached to it.

68
00:03:52,760 --> 00:03:56,980
I've already seen all the YouTube videos spanning off that of people then saying, great,

69
00:03:57,080 --> 00:03:58,580
we'll hook it into here, here, and here.

70
00:03:59,020 --> 00:04:03,780
So whether it's cloud, AI, all these, you know, data, they're still going to make changes.

71
00:04:04,520 --> 00:04:06,260
They're still bringing value and doing new things.

72
00:04:06,360 --> 00:04:08,700
So I still think there's a sense of optimism.

73
00:04:09,380 --> 00:04:10,780
The finances might go down, right?

74
00:04:10,940 --> 00:04:14,240
But long-term, people still feel like that's going to come good.

75
00:04:14,760 --> 00:04:17,300
We should still be in it somehow.

76
00:04:17,300 --> 00:04:25,740
And I guess when it comes to forecasts, that is, it's perhaps the most, is it inhuman or unhuman?

77
00:04:26,160 --> 00:04:29,320
I forget how Rob Zombie put it in that song way back when.

78
00:04:29,700 --> 00:04:33,980
But anyway, it's like the most inhuman sort of forecast because it doesn't really indicate

79
00:04:33,980 --> 00:04:39,420
how many people where they'll be hired or laid off to help enjoy this spend.

80
00:04:39,900 --> 00:04:47,100
But it does look like the other thing in this coverage that I think is interesting and ongoing is this dissonance is too fancy of a word,

81
00:04:47,340 --> 00:04:51,560
but I will use it nonetheless, is the notion that like all these tech people,

82
00:04:51,700 --> 00:04:56,800
I think the current roundup from, as John Gruber kind of posted from a CNBC article,

83
00:04:56,800 --> 00:05:03,540
is that there's about 60,000 people in the, it's probably mostly U.S. centric,

84
00:05:03,620 --> 00:05:07,740
but in the kind of tech world that have been announced that are going to be laid off.

85
00:05:08,120 --> 00:05:14,100
Boy, that was a sentence that my sixth grade English teacher would have just puked all over right there.

86
00:05:15,180 --> 00:05:20,820
But meanwhile, as covered in both the Forrester and the Gartner forecast, or maybe only the Gartner one,

87
00:05:21,000 --> 00:05:25,600
like there's still a regular or normie enterprises are still desperate to hire people.

88
00:05:25,980 --> 00:05:31,440
So it is this odd, like this odd sort of disconnect between the two of them.

89
00:05:31,980 --> 00:05:36,380
But I don't know, it seems like, you know, from your perspective, Ben, when you see these forecast numbers,

90
00:05:37,080 --> 00:05:37,760
what do you do?

91
00:05:37,820 --> 00:05:42,260
Are you like, oh, got to go get another cup of coffee or do you get excited about them?

92
00:05:42,600 --> 00:05:46,740
No, I think Ed's right in terms of the industry itself.

93
00:05:46,840 --> 00:05:51,600
It's surprisingly resilient to, you know, these sort of downturns.

94
00:05:51,680 --> 00:05:53,620
And I'll take 5%.

95
00:05:53,620 --> 00:05:55,520
That's quite a good number.

96
00:05:55,640 --> 00:05:56,300
I'll take it.

97
00:05:56,500 --> 00:05:56,720
Yeah.

98
00:05:56,800 --> 00:05:57,540
That sounds great.

99
00:05:57,920 --> 00:06:00,640
And, you know, you were talking about other parallels.

100
00:06:01,020 --> 00:06:02,760
So I did see one about gaming.

101
00:06:02,920 --> 00:06:05,620
There was a survey about gaming in the UK.

102
00:06:05,780 --> 00:06:07,460
It's quite important to the UK economy.

103
00:06:07,780 --> 00:06:11,080
It generated 11 billion GB pounds last year.

104
00:06:11,340 --> 00:06:13,420
So it's a big industry.

105
00:06:13,920 --> 00:06:21,840
And there's been quite an explosion in things like university courses that deal with various aspects of game creation.

106
00:06:22,080 --> 00:06:29,700
You know, everything from project management all the way through to, you know, art design and graphics and storytelling and everything really.

107
00:06:29,860 --> 00:06:34,020
So, you know, yeah, kids' screen time.

108
00:06:34,140 --> 00:06:35,180
What do you do about that?

109
00:06:35,300 --> 00:06:38,740
It's like it could be the best time they're spending in the day.

110
00:06:39,160 --> 00:06:39,960
Yeah, yeah.

111
00:06:40,160 --> 00:06:41,060
Career-wise.

112
00:06:41,340 --> 00:06:41,820
It could be.

113
00:06:41,840 --> 00:06:44,080
But at the same time, it might not be.

114
00:06:44,200 --> 00:06:47,580
And I think, I mean, just a rat hole on that a little bit.

115
00:06:47,880 --> 00:07:05,700
Like, it is, I remember when I was a kid, I spent a lot of time trying to, like, send a message in a bottle in my memory palace of, like, hey, remember when you thought those adults were a bunch of, you know, these video games are melting your brain and TV?

116
00:07:05,940 --> 00:07:08,420
Like, just remember what you thought about that in the future.

117
00:07:08,420 --> 00:07:13,920
And so I try to apply that kind of thinking from my childhood.

118
00:07:14,360 --> 00:07:21,160
There's a lot of other messages in a bottle I sent that you just open up as an adult and you're like, yep, that's what a six-year-old would think.

119
00:07:22,640 --> 00:07:32,260
But anyways, like, I do, I struggle with, I guess it's more, as always, about the time you spend on good activities versus bad ones, right?

120
00:07:32,260 --> 00:07:40,480
Because I, I played a lot of King's Quest and even though I shouldn't have been at the time, Leisure Suit Larry and Sop with Camel, things like that.

121
00:07:40,660 --> 00:07:40,720
Risky.

122
00:07:41,080 --> 00:07:41,300
Yeah.

123
00:07:41,480 --> 00:07:47,660
But, but then also, like, I spent a lot of time typing and, you know, writing things and stuff like that.

124
00:07:47,660 --> 00:07:58,840
And I often, like, I haven't, as always, when it comes to kids, I can never, my kids, I can never figure out how to have them both understand and then enjoy the dad wisdom I give them.

125
00:07:58,840 --> 00:08:08,660
And what I try to tell them is, like, if you just spent, like, four hours a week on wholesome activities, I would almost not care how you spend your other time.

126
00:08:09,120 --> 00:08:12,680
But you got to, like, there's this floor of helpful stuff you got to do.

127
00:08:12,780 --> 00:08:18,380
And before it's, I don't know, and this is, this isn't a parenting advice podcast, although.

128
00:08:19,520 --> 00:08:21,660
Well, everything, balance in all things.

129
00:08:21,800 --> 00:08:22,940
That's what you're saying, isn't it?

130
00:08:22,940 --> 00:08:24,060
Balance in all things.

131
00:08:24,600 --> 00:08:28,320
And, you know, I like the reference to the memory palace there.

132
00:08:28,900 --> 00:08:32,140
Sadly, I'm in, I'm in charge of the DIY of my memory palace.

133
00:08:32,360 --> 00:08:34,420
So it fell to pieces here years and years ago.

134
00:08:34,760 --> 00:08:42,460
You're just the, you're just, you're just, did you, did you all, did you all have that show we had in the States that was, what was the name of it?

135
00:08:42,460 --> 00:08:43,760
It was one of those big family shows.

136
00:08:43,760 --> 00:08:49,520
And there was this, there was this, the super, the repair person, Schneider, with the leather vest.

137
00:08:49,740 --> 00:08:56,000
And he would run around with his, his big old, like, Magnum PI 70s mustache and his belt of tools.

138
00:08:56,200 --> 00:08:58,200
And he's always fixing stuff up.

139
00:08:58,280 --> 00:08:59,820
You got to have a Schneider in there doing things.

140
00:08:59,920 --> 00:09:08,580
Well, speaking of DIY, you know, I thought, I thought a topic that might be interesting to go over is just kind of, I mean, this is a reoccurring topic.

141
00:09:08,580 --> 00:09:16,260
But kind of, you know, you can't use the word trolling anymore, as in dredging stuff up, right?

142
00:09:16,360 --> 00:09:19,840
Like, you know, where you would, like, throw a troll out there to just kind of, like, collect up.

143
00:09:20,020 --> 00:09:25,120
So I need to find a new word for that, because trolling has been taken over to mean something entirely different.

144
00:09:25,560 --> 00:09:33,180
Anyways, as a kind of collecting up of what we're seeing in the area of low code, I'm always really interested in what's going on there.

145
00:09:33,180 --> 00:09:45,400
So, you know, first of all, I just by coincidence of planning this, I was at a, like one of the, like an executive dinner, two nights ago now in Brussels.

146
00:09:45,720 --> 00:09:53,540
And I just happened to one of the persons, the persons, one of the people I was sitting next to, I was asking, he brought up low code, and I was asking about it.

147
00:09:53,540 --> 00:10:03,800
And they, this person was, had been using low code a lot in, I forget what type of organization it was, but, you know, big, big enterprise organization.

148
00:10:04,800 --> 00:10:11,000
And there's a couple of things that, that, that he said about low code usage after doing it for a couple of years.

149
00:10:11,440 --> 00:10:25,280
One, he said that the promise of it, that the kind of, the initial promise of it works, like that you can actually use low code platforms to quickly put together applications.

150
00:10:25,640 --> 00:10:33,900
And then there were two other things, but then there were two drawbacks that he was concerned about, or potentials for better management of, to put it one way.

151
00:10:34,020 --> 00:10:46,900
And the first one was that it can be a very dangerous tech debt legacy trap situation, because you can have people like spin up or do these kind of low code apps.

152
00:10:47,380 --> 00:11:01,880
And part of the speed and also kind of profile of doing it, like kind of the community sort of, it doesn't encourage, but it inadvertently encourages not caring about the, the multi-year sustainability of the architecture and the application that you're doing.

153
00:11:01,980 --> 00:11:09,900
You know, not that high code people are that much better at it either, but at least have it there as a, maybe we should do that.

154
00:11:10,040 --> 00:11:18,040
That's right. It's, it's at least in their top 10 principles you should live your professional life by like so many top 10 principles through time.

155
00:11:18,220 --> 00:11:21,500
They are often not followed except for the really critical ones.

156
00:11:22,760 --> 00:11:30,780
And then the third thing that he said that was, that was interesting because this is a topic of, you know, being in software vendors, we always have an odd relationship with.

157
00:11:30,780 --> 00:11:36,280
He was like, there also is a pretty high degree of lock-in that you have to worry about.

158
00:11:36,540 --> 00:11:44,700
Like there's not really portability from one low code platform to another, let alone any portability.

159
00:11:45,060 --> 00:11:46,440
So it is something you have to worry about.

160
00:11:46,580 --> 00:11:53,580
And like the kind of like analysis that, that, that we ended up on was that like, yeah, it's probably great.

161
00:11:53,580 --> 00:11:58,940
If you go in assuming you're just going to get rid of this application after a year, right?

162
00:11:59,020 --> 00:12:03,640
Otherwise it requires a lot of thinking for, for like multi-year stuff.

163
00:12:03,760 --> 00:12:06,140
So that's my, uh, my readout.

164
00:12:06,260 --> 00:12:07,640
Maybe that's a better word than trolling.

165
00:12:07,780 --> 00:12:11,440
That's, that's my sort of like gathering of, of the low code thing at the moment.

166
00:12:11,440 --> 00:12:12,600
But how about yourself, Ed?

167
00:12:12,620 --> 00:12:16,980
What, uh, when, when you bump up against low code stuff, what, uh, what are you seeing out there?

168
00:12:17,420 --> 00:12:22,960
Um, I just see a massive to-do list for me, as in, I find it kind of fascinating.

169
00:12:22,960 --> 00:12:24,680
It's not an area I've ever looked at much.

170
00:12:24,680 --> 00:12:28,960
And I, I can't remember when it was maybe a year ago, but I remember also that whenever

171
00:12:28,960 --> 00:12:34,560
the last big Microsoft probably ignite was, there was a whole section on low code, no code

172
00:12:34,560 --> 00:12:36,120
and their whole sort of power platform.

173
00:12:36,420 --> 00:12:40,200
And it's something that, uh, where I am Jersey, this tiny little island, we've got a little

174
00:12:40,200 --> 00:12:43,340
sort of digital sector that's trying to do more of this kind of stuff.

175
00:12:43,340 --> 00:12:47,700
And they ran a course on no code or low code, no code, which I couldn't do.

176
00:12:47,760 --> 00:12:48,480
It was during the week.

177
00:12:48,480 --> 00:12:51,380
And I just thought, you know what, I'd love to learn all about it, but I've, I've got

178
00:12:51,380 --> 00:12:52,340
other stuff to do at the minute.

179
00:12:52,580 --> 00:12:54,160
And that's where it's perpetually sat.

180
00:12:54,280 --> 00:12:57,820
But I watched a bit of the, the Microsoft one, which had some sort of very intriguing,

181
00:12:58,380 --> 00:13:02,540
you know, take a photo of this scrawled on paper and it will turn it into a UI

182
00:13:02,540 --> 00:13:03,780
and do this stuff for you.

183
00:13:03,980 --> 00:13:04,260
Wow.

184
00:13:04,280 --> 00:13:04,640
That's cool.

185
00:13:04,820 --> 00:13:06,600
I think, wow, that, yeah, that looks brilliant.

186
00:13:06,720 --> 00:13:07,440
That's very well done.

187
00:13:07,820 --> 00:13:09,860
And then a bit of me think, but it won't be that simple, right?

188
00:13:09,900 --> 00:13:11,340
Because if it was, we wouldn't have developers.

189
00:13:12,160 --> 00:13:15,620
And now, and again, I heard, sorry to go back to it already, but chat GPT comes up.

190
00:13:15,660 --> 00:13:19,180
And again, I think, right, actually it's one of those areas that has snuck up on me

191
00:13:19,180 --> 00:13:21,180
and I've heard lots of noise about it.

192
00:13:21,180 --> 00:13:25,700
I know we had someone internally at VMware who, who turned around a project in short timeframe

193
00:13:25,700 --> 00:13:30,300
as a very much solo effort using Microsoft's power platform, pulling info out of Salesforce,

194
00:13:30,520 --> 00:13:31,040
did a lot of stuff.

195
00:13:31,120 --> 00:13:33,020
And there was a, you know, an internal talk about it.

196
00:13:33,220 --> 00:13:34,720
And it's like, wow, that looks brilliant.

197
00:13:34,980 --> 00:13:38,660
That looks like something I could be, I would be looking at and going, how can I, like the

198
00:13:38,660 --> 00:13:42,720
news gathering, there must be a more efficient way than me doing what I do.

199
00:13:43,060 --> 00:13:47,140
And whether it's one of these no code platforms, low code, whether it's a better way of, you

200
00:13:47,140 --> 00:13:51,860
know, scraping it, all that stuff is, it's definitely in the realm of, I should be able to go and

201
00:13:51,860 --> 00:13:53,820
say to chat GPT, do all this stuff.

202
00:13:53,860 --> 00:13:56,720
And whether it's that or some other, and it just every week presents it to me.

203
00:13:57,360 --> 00:13:58,840
And that is coming more and more.

204
00:13:58,980 --> 00:13:59,840
And I haven't looked at it.

205
00:14:00,060 --> 00:14:02,240
And I, one day it's going to just take over something I did.

206
00:14:02,320 --> 00:14:07,480
And I'll be like, oh, so, you know, for me, that whole, whether it's power platform and

207
00:14:07,480 --> 00:14:08,200
there's others, I'm sure.

208
00:14:08,300 --> 00:14:10,220
But there's an awful lot in it.

209
00:14:10,280 --> 00:14:11,120
I'd like to learn.

210
00:14:11,940 --> 00:14:17,080
Well, you know, I agree with you about the gathering stuff.

211
00:14:17,340 --> 00:14:22,760
And if you, if you ever figure it out, I mean, I think I have spent 25, maybe even 30 years

212
00:14:22,760 --> 00:14:24,800
trying to perfect that process.

213
00:14:24,980 --> 00:14:31,300
And it all basically always amounts to just like way back when literal or virtual post-it

214
00:14:31,300 --> 00:14:33,040
notes just left on a desk.

215
00:14:33,140 --> 00:14:38,200
Like that's, that's pretty much best of breed information gathering.

216
00:14:38,660 --> 00:14:40,520
In your memory palace.

217
00:14:40,760 --> 00:14:42,500
This desk is in your memory palace.

218
00:14:42,740 --> 00:14:43,040
That's right.

219
00:14:43,400 --> 00:14:44,360
How about yourself, Ben?

220
00:14:44,420 --> 00:14:47,220
What have you been seeing in the, and thinking about in the low code area?

221
00:14:47,880 --> 00:14:50,240
Well, you were, you, you kindly sent me a link.

222
00:14:50,340 --> 00:14:57,520
There was about, it was from the new stack, an article about Amazon's code catalyst, which

223
00:14:57,520 --> 00:15:04,620
they came out with at the sort of end of last year, which is kind of like low code for

224
00:15:04,620 --> 00:15:06,340
all sorts of developer problems.

225
00:15:06,520 --> 00:15:08,700
You know, where do I get my ID from?

226
00:15:08,780 --> 00:15:09,660
How is it set up?

227
00:15:10,760 --> 00:15:14,200
How do I start a project with some, you know, new piece of code?

228
00:15:14,300 --> 00:15:19,720
How do I get that deployed into environments like staging, production, development, et cetera?

229
00:15:20,440 --> 00:15:25,000
And they came up with this code catalyst thing, which is a whole sort of suite of stuff, didn't

230
00:15:25,000 --> 00:15:25,200
they?

231
00:15:25,200 --> 00:15:32,900
That kind of formalizes all that so that you don't have the problems that are associated

232
00:15:32,900 --> 00:15:35,840
with regular developer environments.

233
00:15:36,000 --> 00:15:43,100
Things like environmental shift, you know, sprawl where things have moved over time and not

234
00:15:43,100 --> 00:15:47,860
everyone on the team is on the same versions of stuff, for example, which cause it, which

235
00:15:47,860 --> 00:15:50,580
can cause problems with builds and various other bits and pieces.

236
00:15:50,740 --> 00:15:55,800
So I was looking through that article that you sent me and I was, I was sort of reading it

237
00:15:55,800 --> 00:15:56,720
and digesting it.

238
00:15:56,720 --> 00:16:01,940
And I came away with, yeah, there are some fundamental things that it would be really nice to solve,

239
00:16:01,940 --> 00:16:09,860
like this problem with drift, you know, between IDs, for example, or the problem of how do

240
00:16:09,860 --> 00:16:14,200
I get started with a project with, you know, decent templates and that kind of thing that's

241
00:16:14,200 --> 00:16:19,500
codified all your standards or a supply chain, you know, and this, anyone who's been following

242
00:16:19,500 --> 00:16:23,120
my stuff knows I'm doing quite a bit of stuff on the supply chains at the minute.

243
00:16:23,940 --> 00:16:25,220
So all of that is good.

244
00:16:25,280 --> 00:16:30,120
I think everyone sort of, there's a consensus around that that sort of stuff is good and having

245
00:16:30,120 --> 00:16:33,280
that as low code as possible helps people to be more productive.

246
00:16:33,280 --> 00:16:34,800
So that is all good.

247
00:16:35,800 --> 00:16:40,140
I think the problem with things like, like Catalyst and like you were saying, Coté, about,

248
00:16:40,260 --> 00:16:47,560
you know, other low code platforms is I am left with a sense of yes, but in a year's time,

249
00:16:47,560 --> 00:16:52,800
if I want to switch away from this stuff, I'm not going to be able to, I get the feeling I'm

250
00:16:52,800 --> 00:16:56,440
going to be very locked in to a vendor's particular view of the world.

251
00:16:56,440 --> 00:17:01,820
And I don't see much in there around open source standards or things that will allow me to port

252
00:17:01,820 --> 00:17:05,020
what I've done to another place safely and efficiently.

253
00:17:05,380 --> 00:17:08,040
And I think that's one of the problems.

254
00:17:08,300 --> 00:17:13,080
I think the other one, possibly specifically just with Code Catalyst, was I just didn't

255
00:17:13,080 --> 00:17:18,160
see anything in that sort of review, if you like, from the new stack about solving the

256
00:17:18,160 --> 00:17:19,620
issue of discoverability.

257
00:17:19,860 --> 00:17:24,800
Like it's okay to have one team working really well, but the stuff they produce needs to be

258
00:17:24,800 --> 00:17:26,080
seen by a hundred other teams.

259
00:17:26,080 --> 00:17:26,880
Right, right, right.

260
00:17:27,320 --> 00:17:33,860
So if that's not exposed well, you know, if there's no sort of backstage GUI, for example,

261
00:17:33,860 --> 00:17:38,240
where they can go and have a portal all the developers can use, where they can see each other's stuff

262
00:17:38,240 --> 00:17:44,120
and see each other's APIs and each other's documentation and each other's microservices, you know, where

263
00:17:44,120 --> 00:17:47,780
they're running and all that sort of stuff, then what have you really done?

264
00:17:47,780 --> 00:17:53,160
You've created a very smooth way of creating more hidden projects.

265
00:17:53,160 --> 00:17:57,780
Is that maybe why there are 17 different ways of doing containers on AWS?

266
00:17:59,540 --> 00:17:59,940
Yeah.

267
00:18:00,600 --> 00:18:02,000
17 teams did their thing.

268
00:18:02,280 --> 00:18:03,080
I joke, right?

269
00:18:03,120 --> 00:18:03,720
They know better than that.

270
00:18:03,820 --> 00:18:06,400
But I see your point around that, Trees.

271
00:18:06,500 --> 00:18:08,900
And it's not even Kubernetes, is it?

272
00:18:08,920 --> 00:18:09,920
It's like EC2.

273
00:18:10,360 --> 00:18:16,040
So, you know, there's kind of like a, it felt like there was a lot of standard avoidance.

274
00:18:16,480 --> 00:18:20,020
Like, oh, let's just avoid that open standard, all that open source stuff.

275
00:18:20,040 --> 00:18:22,820
Because, you know, it's not ours.

276
00:18:23,360 --> 00:18:24,740
It's not invented here syndrome.

277
00:18:24,880 --> 00:18:25,360
I don't know.

278
00:18:25,420 --> 00:18:26,640
It just left me a bit cold.

279
00:18:26,760 --> 00:18:31,060
I was like, yeah, I think we agree on some of the problems that we'd like to solve.

280
00:18:31,060 --> 00:18:35,060
But I think we disagree on the solution and how open that should be.

281
00:18:35,440 --> 00:18:35,840
Yeah, yeah.

282
00:18:35,960 --> 00:18:40,800
I mean, to kind of close that out, and then there's something that you're making me think of.

283
00:18:40,960 --> 00:18:49,020
Like, I think I found that, well, one, talking with people and seeing what they're actually doing in any area.

284
00:18:49,060 --> 00:18:51,640
But in the slow code area, like we were going over, is always useful.

285
00:18:51,780 --> 00:18:58,760
But, like, the thing I'm always very interested in is a lot of examples of the apps you would do with it, right?

286
00:18:58,760 --> 00:19:16,080
And I think that, like, it feels like, you know, what we've all kind of said is there's a good category of problems, or if you want to be super fancy jobs to be done or whatever, that you can apply this to if, you know, like anything else, it's a tool that used well accomplishes the thing.

287
00:19:16,140 --> 00:19:20,100
The old, you know, you don't want to use a screwdriver to drive in a nail.

288
00:19:20,100 --> 00:19:22,680
Even though sometimes you're like, I don't want to go back down the ladder.

289
00:19:23,180 --> 00:19:24,340
I got this screwdriver here.

290
00:19:24,640 --> 00:19:26,060
Let me just try to use this.

291
00:19:26,520 --> 00:19:27,600
That's how I do DIY.

292
00:19:29,840 --> 00:19:39,900
And the other thing, which I think, you know, it's a topic we should think about how we can, like, talk about ongoing is this idea of discoverability, right?

293
00:19:39,940 --> 00:19:56,100
Because it's a big, I think it's almost like a, I don't know what the phrase is, a submarine topic, like in this whole area of, like, I don't know if people still say DevEx, but, like, you know, developer experience and getting better at software that comes up over and over again.

294
00:19:56,100 --> 00:19:59,240
But there's not a lot of discussion about it, right?

295
00:19:59,240 --> 00:20:22,640
So if you look at, if you look at the Tanzu application platform and, like, you know, similarly, like, or the same, like, what's going on in Backstage and all sorts of things, like a huge component of improving developer experience is just like, as I like to joke, getting a better intranet where developers can, like, discover stuff, not that what's going on publicly on the internet, but that what's going on inside their own organization.

296
00:20:22,640 --> 00:20:29,040
And as you were talking about with low code, like, discovering what other people are doing and seeing if you can use it, right?

297
00:20:29,160 --> 00:20:44,360
Like, and I think that, like, just not diagnosing, but finding that idea and then kind of describing how to solve it, hopefully in CY 2023 will come up a lot.

298
00:20:44,420 --> 00:20:52,320
And I think, you know, it's reminding me of, we had this other concept called inner sourcing, which might be one of those things we can revisit.

299
00:20:52,460 --> 00:20:58,820
There was a whole inner sourcing little conference last year that I have bookmarked in my mind palace from last year.

300
00:20:59,000 --> 00:21:07,200
And maybe there's one person in particular, one of my old IBM friends, maybe we should interview him on that topic because he's put a lot of thought into it.

301
00:21:07,200 --> 00:21:15,180
So anyhow, speaking of organizations, there's another thing that, was it, was it Rachel?

302
00:21:15,600 --> 00:21:18,280
No, it was, it was Steven over at RedMonk.

303
00:21:19,040 --> 00:21:25,600
He had a, this is a little like vendor centric, but I think it can quickly, if you're doing like platform engineering,

304
00:21:25,600 --> 00:21:33,320
it can quickly become not tech company centric if you're, if you're building the product of a platform in your organization.

305
00:21:33,720 --> 00:21:42,460
But he was, he was making the point that, you know, that we, we of like, who have Conway's law tattooed on our,

306
00:21:42,700 --> 00:21:47,340
I always find that the metaphor is not good that you tattoo something on your forehead because then you can't see it.

307
00:21:47,440 --> 00:21:51,160
And you also have to write it in reverse, which means other people can't read it.

308
00:21:51,320 --> 00:21:55,220
So you should really have it more tattooed on perhaps the outside of your hand.

309
00:21:55,520 --> 00:21:57,560
You probably would see that more frequently than your forehead.

310
00:21:57,560 --> 00:21:58,560
It'd be good on a podcast.

311
00:21:58,940 --> 00:21:59,180
Yes.

312
00:21:59,200 --> 00:21:59,860
I'd just see it now.

313
00:21:59,940 --> 00:22:00,820
My screen's reversed.

314
00:22:00,940 --> 00:22:01,680
Everything would be fine.

315
00:22:01,820 --> 00:22:02,200
That's true.

316
00:22:02,340 --> 00:22:03,700
It was obviously invented for podcasts.

317
00:22:03,840 --> 00:22:04,080
Yeah.

318
00:22:04,380 --> 00:22:05,220
Whatever this is.

319
00:22:05,480 --> 00:22:06,140
Good, good point.

320
00:22:06,200 --> 00:22:06,460
Good point.

321
00:22:06,740 --> 00:22:09,840
We're solving a lot of mysteries of life just right, right now.

322
00:22:09,840 --> 00:22:21,600
But, you know, he was making the point that if you are building a product that, especially focused with developers, you've got to like, or that is going to be used by developers,

323
00:22:21,980 --> 00:22:28,860
you've got to change your organization structure around to kind of match the architecture and the development teams that you need.

324
00:22:28,940 --> 00:22:37,080
And I think, you know, particularly for vendors, this kind of matches up, right, that you want to have developer-centric people doing it.

325
00:22:37,140 --> 00:22:47,080
But I wanted to explore that idea of, like, what are, like, the ideal organization structures if you're basically supporting developers?

326
00:22:47,440 --> 00:22:55,160
And just to start out with, right, like, this isn't contrary to it, but it doesn't fit neatly into it.

327
00:22:55,160 --> 00:23:10,720
I was talking with one of our customers at a big organization, and they were noting that what they found for their platform team is that, so they almost implicitly have divided their platform team up into two parts.

328
00:23:10,940 --> 00:23:22,780
The people who manage the runtime of the platform, the actual platform, and then the people who are basically the interface to the developers, right?

329
00:23:22,780 --> 00:23:32,580
And they might do a little bit, this is commonly, I don't like this phrase, but I think this team is commonly called, like, DevOps engineering, or even developer relations inside of a company.

330
00:23:33,040 --> 00:23:35,600
It's changing, it's becoming platform engineering.

331
00:23:35,720 --> 00:23:36,660
Exactly, exactly.

332
00:23:37,300 --> 00:23:49,860
And the interesting, I mean, not to go into that stuff too much, but the interesting thing that came out of that is this person was mentioning that they found that you want to have these two teams in the same group.

333
00:23:50,560 --> 00:24:00,540
Because a little contrary to this point of structure, the, let's call it, we'll just call it the platform engineering team, the ones that work directly with developers.

334
00:24:00,860 --> 00:24:12,660
They do work with directly with developers, but to have the most effect on changing the platform, they have to work even more so with the platform team, the runtime team that's building that platform.

335
00:24:12,660 --> 00:24:24,660
And that if you separate out this platform engineering team from the people who actually run the platform, your incentives just get misaligned and you don't, it just doesn't work.

336
00:24:25,360 --> 00:24:33,440
And so, like, you know, again, like, that's not necessarily contrary to this idea of needing to change your organization structure for developer experience.

337
00:24:33,440 --> 00:24:42,020
But it does show, it does show that you have to put a lot of thinking into, like, where are you going to separate out product management when you're doing things internally.

338
00:24:42,400 --> 00:24:56,240
But how about yourself, Ben, what do you think of this idea of you're going to need to pay a lot of attention to the org structure, if you're developing, like we are vendors, like tools for developers, or internally, if you're doing these platforms for developers?

339
00:24:56,740 --> 00:24:57,940
It feels right.

340
00:24:57,940 --> 00:25:01,680
It feels extremely common sense, what Stephen was saying there.

341
00:25:02,820 --> 00:25:12,640
I read through it, too, and I was thinking back to my consulting days when I was traveling around and visiting lots of people and trying to help them become more sort of cloud native.

342
00:25:13,200 --> 00:25:17,200
Every one of those organizations had a function.

343
00:25:17,480 --> 00:25:21,400
You know, it was either a bank or a retailer or automotive or whatever.

344
00:25:22,160 --> 00:25:31,840
They all had a function that was around their product set, you know, and their organization structures were around their product set, including the sort of developer groups and things.

345
00:25:32,000 --> 00:25:44,940
And one thing that was very often forgotten about was, OK, if we want to be good at software, then we have to be good at producing it and getting it consumed by people and out into the open.

346
00:25:44,940 --> 00:26:02,560
And the way to do that is through platforms where you've got platform runtime folks who can make sure that that platform is healthy, and you've got platform engineering folks who can make sure stuff can get on there quickly, safely, securely, so that you've got confidence in the code that you're deploying, right?

347
00:26:02,620 --> 00:26:05,540
Because if you don't have confidence in your code, you don't have anything.

348
00:26:06,560 --> 00:26:07,720
You haven't finished.

349
00:26:08,380 --> 00:26:10,340
So you've got confidence every time.

350
00:26:10,840 --> 00:26:14,260
So the platform engineers are about engineering in confidence.

351
00:26:14,260 --> 00:26:19,440
You know, they're about engineering in safety and security, as well as speed.

352
00:26:20,300 --> 00:26:22,520
You know, speed is not everything.

353
00:26:22,820 --> 00:26:27,820
There's a whole bunch of other stuff that comes along with it if you want to be fully confident in what you're doing.

354
00:26:28,700 --> 00:26:42,200
And I think that's what spoke to me about Stephen's article there, was that it's a case of you have to think about your organizational structure and you have to budget for those two teams to exist.

355
00:26:42,420 --> 00:26:48,480
If you haven't budgeted for them to exist, you're probably not serious about it.

356
00:26:48,520 --> 00:26:50,360
And if you're not serious about it, why?

357
00:26:51,340 --> 00:26:53,520
Because it's sort of fundamentally important.

358
00:26:53,720 --> 00:27:06,840
So he had these two fundamental questions to ask yourself about your organizational structure and about the way that you're incentivizing and investing and using your budget, your IT budget, and where that spend goes.

359
00:27:07,380 --> 00:27:10,240
And saying, like, is that spend going in the right places?

360
00:27:10,440 --> 00:27:11,820
Do you have these two teams?

361
00:27:11,940 --> 00:27:12,720
Are they well funded?

362
00:27:12,880 --> 00:27:13,920
Do they have a good remit?

363
00:27:14,020 --> 00:27:16,140
Do they know what their goal is?

364
00:27:16,660 --> 00:27:17,980
So I thought it was excellent.

365
00:27:18,200 --> 00:27:19,860
I really enjoyed reading that article.

366
00:27:19,860 --> 00:27:26,260
Yeah, yeah, and you're reminding me or buying me the time to think about, to explore the Memory Palace more.

367
00:27:27,000 --> 00:27:44,760
I think to kind of summarize the point he was making, I didn't really explain this well enough, but he was saying that the way you organize to deliver a service is different than the way you organize to deliver a chunk of software, right?

368
00:27:45,660 --> 00:27:53,580
And I think he was, this probably came, you know, I used to work at RedMonk and be an analyst, and these kind of posts often come up after a call you've had with someone.

369
00:27:54,080 --> 00:27:57,980
And so I would imagine he was talking with a public cloud provider, and they were going over this stuff.

370
00:27:58,020 --> 00:28:06,000
And he's like, oh, there's a good blog post, which is, speaking of having the virtual post-it notes everywhere, it's always good to be looking out for that.

371
00:28:06,000 --> 00:28:11,280
But, you know, I think internally, and that definitely applies to, like, vendors, so to speak.

372
00:28:11,400 --> 00:28:25,700
But I think internally, you were just explaining it, like we were both explaining it, the way it applies is, if you're in an IT organization and you're organized around delivering a service, and, you know, the SLAs and the uptime and something working, you still need that.

373
00:28:25,700 --> 00:28:34,260
But you also have to realize that you are going to need a different organization structure, in addition to that, about delivering a product, a chunk of software.

374
00:28:34,520 --> 00:28:44,680
And it's just a different way of thinking, a different set of incentives and things like that, which is unfortunately easy to miss or something.

375
00:28:45,000 --> 00:28:48,480
Well, we just have a short one here.

376
00:28:48,860 --> 00:28:53,960
Well, some people might consider it long, but it's short for our typical thing.

377
00:28:54,420 --> 00:29:00,240
We'll put links to all of these things over, as always, at tanzutalk.com, if you want to go check that out.

378
00:29:00,840 --> 00:29:03,000
And usually we broadcast these live.

379
00:29:03,160 --> 00:29:09,220
Today we did not, because of some exciting enterprise procurement processes, speaking of organization structure.

380
00:29:10,480 --> 00:29:15,960
So, this is just the audio-only edition of it, but, you know, we record sometimes on Tuesdays.

381
00:29:16,000 --> 00:29:18,520
I think we'll probably, I don't know, I'm always screwing that up.

382
00:29:18,900 --> 00:29:19,340
Who knows?

383
00:29:19,380 --> 00:29:21,160
We have no predictability due to me.

384
00:29:21,640 --> 00:29:26,360
But anyway, you should go to tanzutalk.com and subscribe to this and check out the additional notes.

385
00:29:26,980 --> 00:29:29,040
And with that, we'll see everyone next time.

386
00:29:29,160 --> 00:29:29,680
Bye-bye.

387
00:29:30,300 --> 00:29:30,700
Bye.

388
00:29:31,220 --> 00:29:31,420
Bye.