As a young software developper, what really bores me with Agile, is the name, the shiny box you put things into, where it should just be named "Good practices for software developement". It's the mentality of selling things as products, with some kind of prebuilt ideology and aesthetic built along with the core, that really makes me run far far away.

I don't want to be sold a product. The fact that it led people to try new ways of developping software, be it TDD or pair programming or whatever, is good, but heck, just give me the core idea, remove the gift wrap, and go away. I don't want nor need some kind of new age manager coach.

Anyway, the article seems to be making this very point in some way, but then, why the name agile ? Well for marketing of course. So, while i sort of agree with the article, well i'll just be far away looking, thanks.

Implementing scrum turned our team from productive and mostly free of overhead to overbearing, involving a lot of long ass meetings (all meetings are long if you have to stand) and produced a lot of additional confusion. The interesting thing is that previously, with our specs and our so-called waterfall approach were were more agile. It happened naturally as we naturally did incremental development and we naturally talked to each other when we needed to, with no annoying scrum meetings and asinine bs from managers. People say managers have no voice at scrums, but what is a scrum master anyway? Everyone who doesn't write code is a manager and their opinion can interfere with progress. And of course the idiot child product manager would constantly lecture people about talking too much, except she would never shut up herself.

Even if a meeting is 15 minutes, if it is irritating, insulting, distracting and undermining, then it negatively impacts productivity for at least an hour after. I took to. Having breakfast afterwards, where I normally wouldn't eat breakfast, just to get centered so I could get some work done for the rest of the day.

I left that company soon after. If I had stayed i would have gone postal, or had to hire a lawyer to sue them under the ADA for torturing me by making me stand and listen to sanctimonious bullshit from idiots.

People say, when a bad experience is described that it wasn't being done right. Well i see no difference between what i experienced and what is being advocated.

Yes, there is a lot of anger towards the agile movement because it was sold as a tool to pointy haired bosses to impose, rather than a grassroots movement among engineers that embraced flexibility.

That said, on my own we've adopted a number of so-called agile methodologies like incremental and iterative development.

But the whole movement I'd oriented around imposing ideology on people. This is wrong.

For instance, whenever unit tests or test driven development comes up the proponents act like anyone not doing things this way is incompetent. I think the reverse is true, but I would never say there is ONE TRUE WAY. Agile proponents often seem to say there is only ONE TRUE WAY.

Also, don't mod me down just because I work differently to you. This is the ideology of the ONE TRUE WAY that is just wrong.

Programmers come in all shapes and sizes. They actually can be productive and work in a different than I do or you do.

congrats! It's always inspiring to see people having success doing what they love. 200 users seems almost laughably smalltime compared to some of the companies who get featured on here, but to me, and I'm sure much of the HN readership, it's a dream; if I can get 200 paying users of my business when I launch I'll be ecstatic!

It's really good to see a success story which doesn't focus on "hey wow, I got a million users overnight through sheer luck". It reminds us that 99% of the time, companies are built slowly and surely, not astronomically.

I don't know how to tell you this, but...I think you meant Neil Armstrong.