The Tools Will Change (The Work Won’t) - Asterisk Pound
Why frameworks come and go, but the core of software engineering stays the same — and how to think about tools without chasing trends.
This post is part of The Modern Software Engineer, a series on building software sustainably in a constantly changing industry.
The Tools Will Change (The Work Won’t)
Every few years, the industry convinces itself that it has finally found the solution.
A new framework. A new language. A new paradigm. A new way to build everything better, faster, and cleaner.
And for a moment, it feels true.
Then time passes. Tradeoffs appear. Complexity creeps in. And the cycle starts again.
The Constant Turnover of Tools
If you’ve been in software long enough, you’ve seen this pattern repeat:
- A tool promises simplicity
- Adoption explodes
- Best practices emerge
- Edge cases pile up
- Abstractions leak
- A “better” solution appears
None of this is accidental.
Software evolves in response to real problems — but it also accumulates complexity at the same time.
Every layer added removes friction somewhere and adds it somewhere else.
Why Tooling Changes So Fast
Most tools don’t fail because they’re bad.
They fail because:
- requirements change
- scale increases
- teams grow
- use cases expand
- assumptions break
What worked perfectly for a small team often struggles under:
- high traffic
- large teams
- long-lived codebases
- regulatory constraints
- performance requirements
The tool didn’t fail. The context changed.
The Illusion of the “Right Stack”
There’s a persistent idea in tech that choosing the right stack will solve most problems.
It won’t.
Tools can:
- speed you up
- slow you down
- make mistakes easier or harder
- influence architecture
But they can’t:
- make good decisions for you
- define your product
- fix poor communication
- prevent bad assumptions
Most real-world failures come from process and design, not technology choice.
What Experienced Engineers Notice
Over time, something interesting happens.
You stop asking:
“What’s the best framework?”
And start asking:
“What problem am I actually solving?”
You start recognizing patterns:
- state management problems repeat
- data consistency is always hard
- debugging distributed systems never gets easy
- performance issues surface in predictable ways
Frameworks change. These problems don’t.
The Value of Boring Technology
There’s a reason experienced engineers often advocate for boring solutions.
Boring means:
- well understood
- well documented
- predictable
- easy to hire for
- stable over time
That doesn’t mean never using new tools.
It means being intentional about where you take risk.
Novelty is best used:
- at the edges
- in isolated systems
- where failure is cheap
- where learning is the goal
Not at the core of something mission-critical.
How to Evaluate New Tools Without Chasing Hype
A simple filter helps:
- Does this solve a problem I actually have?
- Does it reduce complexity, or just move it?
- Can I explain it to another developer?
- What happens if it’s abandoned?
- Would I still choose this in two years?
If the answers aren’t clear, it’s usually too early.
What Stays Constant
Despite everything changing, a few things remain true:
- Clear thinking beats clever code
- Simpler systems last longer
- Debugging skill matters more than syntax
- Communication is part of engineering
- Tradeoffs never go away
Tools are temporary. Judgment lasts.
Looking Ahead
In the next part of this series, we’ll talk about specialization — and why the question of “Should I specialize or generalize?” becomes unavoidable as your career progresses.
Because at some point, everyone has to choose how they want to grow.