>Good software might begat the need for more good and useful software.
Where's the proof for that? And what do you define "good SW"? For the management, "good SW' is whatever makes money fast. It's business.
SW isn't like building chruches or bridges, something to last 100+ years, but something with an incredibly limited lifespan, that will have to be rewritten anyway, so why bother investing too much in "good SW" if "OK SW" will do the same job anyway?
Where's the proof for that? And what do you define "good SW"? For the management, "good SW' is whatever makes money fast. It's business.
SW isn't like building chruches or bridges, something to last 100+ years, but something with an incredibly limited lifespan, that will have to be rewritten anyway, so why bother investing too much in "good SW" if "OK SW" will do the same job anyway?