<p>DevOps isn't just a <em>different</em> way of doing things, it is a <em>better</em> way of doing things. Perhaps it will help me to make my point if I rephrase the question in a different context - the context of the industrial age, the railroad and the steam hammer:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Does a railroad company need Steam Hammers if it already lays track at an acceptable speed?</p>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>I mean, steam hammers from the business view are about speed and quality, right?</p>
<p>What does it mean for a construction company contracting for the railroad that is laying track &quot;fast enough&quot; for their customers without steam hammers? Which of these might apply?</p>
<ol>
<li><p>They lay track at a sufficient level, no change is required</p>
</li>
<li><p>They use steam hammers but don't know it or call the steam hammer something else</p>
</li>
<li><p>They use something totally different and better than a steam hammer and we really should find out what it is (before it is too late)</p>
</li>
<li><p>They are awfully wrong: their speed and quality are below their knowledge and they will know it when they begin to lose bids to other contractors.</p>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>The answer is obviously probably #4. This hypothetical company may not see the problem with the next financial report - perhaps it will take a few years - but eventually it will become clear how and why competitors outperform businesses still manually &quot;laying track&quot; as it were. Sure, it's possible they have come up with a diesel powered hammer that is more efficient and less prone to malfunction or breakdowns, but not likely.</p>
<p>Thinking that they can outperform the steam hammer is going to get this company left behind. Sure, an individual group may have their steam hammer blow up and fall apart and perhaps that one group has such trouble with their steam hammer that it would have been more efficient in <em>that one case</em> to do things the old fashioned way, but they are the exception to the rule and the problem likely was that their steam hammer was poorly built and/or poorly maintained.</p>
<p>The industrial age is coming and the railroad company can either check out the competition and then try to get their own steam hammers, or get left behind and eventually succumb to their irrelevance and antiquity.</p>
<p>DevOps is no different. It's just another iteration of automation that companies can either embrace or ignore at their own peril much like the steam hammer.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2017-08-31T19:16:19.740Z
2020-10-30T15:41:57.723Z
2020-10-30T15:41:57.723Z
James Shewey
<p>I mean, DevOps is, from the business view, about speed and quality, right?</p>

<p>What does it mean if a company is growing and fast enough for their customers without devops? Does one of the following apply?</p>

<ol>
<li>They did, or do software development at sufficient level, no change is required.</li>
<li>They do DevOps but don't know it/gave it another name.</li>
<li>They do something totally different and better than DevOps as we know it and we really should find out what it is (before it is too late).</li>
<li>They are awfully wrong: their speed and quality are below their knowledge and they will know it as of next financial report (in case they manage to survive long enough to see it).</li>
</ol>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-01T18:11:36.433Z
DevOps is nothing new really, do they use source control ? do they have continuous integration with a proper build system ? can they update-deploy your application in an automated fashion ? do they have unit-testing integrated as part of the automated build ?  If you answered yes to all of them then you already have the bases for a devops operations.  The terms DevOps is recent but many of us can safely claim 10-20 years experience nonetheless.
Newtopian
<culture>
Does a company need DevOps if it already delivers software at acceptable speed?
Ta Mu
# Does a company need DevOps if it already delivers software at acceptable speed?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-08-31)

I mean, DevOps is, from the business view, about speed and quality, right?

What does it mean if a company is growing and fast enough for their customers without devops? Does one of the following apply?

1. They did, or do software development at sufficient level, no change is required.
2. They do DevOps but don't know it/gave it another name.
3. They do something totally different and better than DevOps as we know it and we really should find out what it is (before it is too late).
4. They are awfully wrong: their speed and quality are below their knowledge and they will know it as of next financial report (in case they manage to survive long enough to see it).

**Tags:** culture

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: DevOps is nothing new really, do they use source control ? do they have continuous integration with a proper build system ? can they update-deploy your application in an automated fashion ? do they have unit-testing integrated as part of the automated build ?  If you answered yes to all of them then you already have the bases for a devops operations.  The terms DevOps is recent but many of us can safely claim 10-20 years experience nonetheless.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2017-08-31. Score: 11 | Accepted answer

DevOps isn't just a *different* way of doing things, it is a *better* way of doing things. Perhaps it will help me to make my point if I rephrase the question in a different context - the context of the industrial age, the railroad and the steam hammer:

> Does a railroad company need Steam Hammers if it already lays track at an acceptable speed?
>
> ---

> I mean, steam hammers from the business view are about speed and quality, right?
>
> What does it mean for a construction company contracting for the railroad that is laying track "fast enough" for their customers without steam hammers? Which of these might apply?
>
> 1. They lay track at a sufficient level, no change is required
> 2. They use steam hammers but don't know it or call the steam hammer something else
> 3. They use something totally different and better than a steam hammer and we really should find out what it is (before it is too late)
> 4. They are awfully wrong: their speed and quality are below their knowledge and they will know it when they begin to lose bids to other contractors.

The answer is obviously probably #4. This hypothetical company may not see the problem with the next financial report - perhaps it will take a few years - but eventually it will become clear how and why competitors outperform businesses still manually "laying track" as it were. Sure, it's possible they have come up with a diesel powered hammer that is more efficient and less prone to malfunction or breakdowns, but not likely.

Thinking that they can outperform the steam hammer is going to get this company left behind. Sure, an individual group may have their steam hammer blow up and fall apart and perhaps that one group has such trouble with their steam hammer that it would have been more efficient in *that one case* to do things the old fashioned way, but they are the exception to the rule and the problem likely was that their steam hammer was poorly built and/or poorly maintained.

The industrial age is coming and the railroad company can either check out the competition and then try to get their own steam hammers, or get left behind and eventually succumb to their irrelevance and antiquity.

DevOps is no different. It's just another iteration of automation that companies can either embrace or ignore at their own peril much like the steam hammer.


---

