> Siloed Applicationns are a terrible UI and holdover from the economics of proprietary shrink-wrapped software which itself is a skeuomorphism from the physical world of nonreplicable goods
Siloed applications are UI neutral and represent decoupling, which enables progress and resilience. Excessive interdependence is how you lose Google Reader because other services have changed requirements.
What? Getting rid of Google Reader was a business decision.
> Siloed applications are UI neutral and represent decoupling, which enables progress and resilience.
The medieval manorial economy is resilient. Is that progress?
What happened to unified look and feel? and rich interactions between widgets? The smalltalk and Oberon GUI visions? All that requires more integration.
I get that we need to make the here and no work, but that is done via the en-mass translation of language-specific package manager packages to distro packages (static or shared, don't care), not vendoring.
> What? Getting rid of Google Reader was a business decision
It has been widely reported that a significant factor in that business decisions was Google’s massively coupled codebase and the fact that Reader had dependencies on parts of it that were going to have breaking changes to support other services.
> The medieval manorial economy is resilient.
It’s not, compared to capitalist and modern mixed economies, and unnecessary and counterproductive coupling between unrelated functions is a problem there, too.
> Is that progress?
Compared to its immediate precedents, generally, yes.
Siloed applications are UI neutral and represent decoupling, which enables progress and resilience. Excessive interdependence is how you lose Google Reader because other services have changed requirements.