Login | Register   
RSS Feed
Download our iPhone app
Browse DevX
Sign up for e-mail newsletters from DevX

Posted by Gigi Sayfan on October 6, 2016

Agile practices grew out of challenges in software development and have been extended to many related activities such as database design, modeling and product management. Many budding startup companies embraced agile practices. The nimble and feedback-based approach works superbly for a couple of guys burning the midnight oil in a room or garage. But, founding an actual company has always been a formal and tedious process that can take the founders' focus off the main activities that evolve the product. Stripe decided to change that. The Atlas initiative aims to take a lot of the burden off your shoulders--including incorporating in Delaware, opening a business bank account, registering the new company with the IRS, opening a Stripe account for accepting payments, tax consulting and even more of tools and services. Atlas can also be used by non-US founders that believe incorporating in the US is the best route for their business.

Startup Ease

Atlas is still in Beta, but already has an impressive network of partners. During the beta, there is a one-time fee of $500. Once you send in your application, you should have your company up and running within a week! This is quite amazing.

How many potential new startup companies never make it out of the side project stage because of the friction and difficulty of actually starting a company? How many companies waste a lot of time and resources at the critical early stage to get their company off the ground? Atlas is an ambitious proposition and I'm very curious to see how it pans out. If you're an aspiring entrepreneur who has considered starting your own company, Alas may be just the right thing for you.

Posted by Gigi Sayfan on September 15, 2016

Agile practices help you develop software that meets the user needs faster and safer — and that responds quickly to changes in the requirements, environment or technological advances. But, there is one "secret" practice that is not often mentioned in the context of Agile development. This is really an "un-practice". The idea is to flat out not do something. It could be a requirement (this will require negotiating with the customer), a refactoring or a bug fix. Just because something is on the backlog doesn't mean it always needs to be done. Extreme Programming calls it YAGNI (You ain't gonna need it) where you postpone doing things that are not needed immediately.


Being minimalist by design is often neglected. Everybody wants to eventually conquer the world, right? Another aspect of this mindset is over-engineering. A lot of effort is expended towards building infrastructure, scalability and automation that isn't necessarily needed. Why is it so important and why is it often ignored? It is important because Agile is all about delivering real value, really quickly. If you work on something that's not really needed, you just wasted time and effort.


The reason it's often ignored or not practiced fully is that it's difficult to be disciplined. You start working on a cool feature or capability and want to keep evolving and improving it even if it's not providing immediate business value. On the infrastructure/implementation side, developers are often worried about technical debt. I'm often guilty of trying to get the project "right" from the beginning. If you want to really deliver the maximum business value in each iteration, you have to be very aware and explicit about what you plan and how you go about it. Just paying lip service to the idea is not good enough.

Posted by Gigi Sayfan on August 23, 2016

Building software used to be simple. You worked on one system with one executable. You compiled the executable and if the compilation passed, you could run your executable and play with it. Not anymore--and trying to follow Agile principles can make it even more complex. Today systems are made of many loosely-coupled programs and services. Some (maybe most) of these services are third-party. Both your code and the other services (in-house and third-party) depend on a large number of libraries, which require constant upgrades to keep up-to-date (security patches are almost always mandatory). In addition, these days, a lot more systems are heavily data-driven, which means you don't deal with just code anymore. You have to make sure your persistent stores contain the data for decision making. In addition, many systems are implemented using multiple programming languages, each with their own build tool-chain. This situation is becoming more and more common.

Maintaining Agility

To follow Agile principles and allow an individual developer to have a quick build cycle of edit-built-test requires significant effort. In most cases it is worth it. There are two representative cases: small and large:

    In the small case, the organization is relatively small and young. The entire system (not including third-party services) can fit on a single machine (even if in a very degraded form). In the large case, the organization is larger, it's been around for longer and there are multiple independent systems developed by independent teams.

The big case can often be broken down into multiple small cases. So, let's focus on the small case. The recommended solution is to invest the time and effort required to allow each developer to run everything on their own machine. That may mean supporting cross-platform development even though the production environment is very carefully specified. It might mean creating a lot of tooling and test databases that can be quickly created and populated.

It is important to cleanly separate that functionality from production functionality. I call this capability system in a box. You can run your entire system on a laptop. You may need to mock some services, but overall each developer should be able to test their code locally and be pretty confident it is solid before pushing it to other developers. This buys you a tremendous amount of confidence to move quickly and try things without worrying about breaking the build or development for other people.

Posted by Gigi Sayfan on June 24, 2016

The traditional view of productivity and how to improve it is completely backwards. Most people think of productivity as a personal attribute of themselves (or their subordinates). X does twice as much as Y, or yesterday I had a really good day and accomplished much more than usual. This is a very limited view and it doesn't touch on the real issue.

The real issue is organizational productivity. The bottom line. The level of unproductively increases with scale. This is nothing new. It is one of the reasons that miniature startups can beat multi-billion corporations. But, most organizations look at the inefficiencies introduced with scale as a process or a communication problem, "If you improve the process or the communication between groups, then you'll improve your situation." There is some merit to this idea, but in the end, larger organizations still have a much greater amount of unproductivity compared to smaller organizations.

The individual employees at the bottom of an organizational hierarchy work approximately as hard as individual startup employees. The middle management does its thing, but is unable to eliminate or significantly minimize this large-organization unproductively tax. In some cases, there is a business justification for the larger organization to go more slowly. For example, if you have a mature product used by a large, and mostly happy, user base then you don't want to change the UI every three months and frustrate your existing users with weird design experiments. You might want to do A-B testing on a small percentage, however. The current thinking is that this unavoidable. Large companies just can't innovate quickly. Large companies either create internal autonomous "startups" or acquire startups and try to integrate them. But, both approaches miss out on important benefits.

I don't have an answer, just nagging feeling that we shouldn't accept this unproductively tax as an axiom. I look forward to some creative approaches that will let big companies innovate at startup-like speeds, while maintaining the advantages of scale.

Thanks for your registration, follow us on our social networks to keep up-to-date