Eric Evans published the original book about DDD, “Domain-Driven Design, Tackling Complexity in the Heart of Software, ” in 2004. It took more than 10 years to become a thing and even longer to not be considered “exotic” and “a theoretical but unnecessarily complicated paradigm.”
In 2024, DDD can be considered a commodity in the sense of the word defined in Wardley mapping (at least in Europe). There are conferences with thousands of attendees, new books every year, and tech start-ups looking for engineers with DDD experience or at least awareness. As usual in this young industry full of people packing old ideas in shiny new envelopes and selling them for the big bucks, one question returns: “Is DDD a hype?”.
The picture in the header of this post is from computerhistory.org (thank you). It shows the first Colossus operational at Bletchley Park in 1944. Computers and information technology, in general, have changed since that picture, going from punched cards to cloud computing and AI. The key booster was the Internet, paving the way to “Space, the final frontier… to boldly go where no man (and women and everything in-between) has gone before” (Star Trek: Enterprise).
When I became a software developer in 2003, the usual jobs were automating manual processes, connecting servers, and using the web to communicate with users instead of snail mail and fax. (Ok, in Germany, both are still heavily used 🙈.)
The main goal was to ease the sellers’ jobs and day-to-day lives. SaaS was just defined. Software was used to automate existing manual processes, hence slow processes. Understanding the business domain was not important because the innovation was done on the technical level. Engineers could lay back and let product managers and designers tell you everything they need from a computer to execute —ideally, as an ordered list, in very exact words 🤓.
Then, mobile phones became the rulers of our lives. They were more powerful than personal computers, not only because of their RAM and CPU but also because they were portable. They allowed us to take and share pictures and videos, ask for timetables, buy tickets, and look for weather changes while moving. 24 hours a day. The differentiators of a product changed from “how usable” to “how easy to use” and “how fast it evolves”. The colour of a button became irrelevant compared to the whole user experience and the user’s perception of a product.
Today, anyone with a logical brain can learn and write software. Infrastructure is cheap and easily accessible without a substantial up-front investment. Being on-demand, companies can run short-term experiences without significant risks. Understanding tech is no longer a key differentiator. Understanding the User became the key to sustainable market shares.
After the phase of simply automating existing processes followed at work or to achieve a goal, the game has changed. Engineers must not only ensure that the software they create works and is maintainable (readable and extendable) with an acceptable effort, but they also must not ignore the “world outside of bits and bytes” anymore. Product development needs to be collaborative work. Adapting to new market needs, trying new ways, and getting fast feedback are more important than ever. These experiments are not about technology (the users don’t really care if we use MySQL or MongoDB) but about speeding up the users to get their jobs done.
“Are you telling me I can’t build software that solves users’ needs without DDD?! ” That’s a valid remark; I am not. Developers have always written software to solve someone’s goals, even pet projects.
The need for collaboration changes the rules of the game. It changes how we work, understand the underlying problem, and decide what to build (and what not). During collaborative discovery, the user leaves the desks of the product managers and designers and joins our commonly maintained miro boards. DDD enables us to represent the domain understanding in our software and organisation. The strategic design of DDD gives us options for the future without knowing what the future will look like. The tactical patterns give us strong weapons against continuously deteriorating software. DDD unveils how useless questions like “How small is a micro-service?” are. It eliminates the (again) useless answer “It depends”. The answer depends on the context. When asked in a digital context, the answer must always be put in the context of the user’s needs and the socio-technical organisation. It does not depend on the mood of the consultant.
Unlike the usual cases, when an old solution is hyped again in a refurbished version, DDD is not a paradigm invented, forgotten and resurrected after years. It is a paradigm for solving problems in a way that has always been valid, but until a few years ago, it has not been considered important enough. It has needed years of businesses wasting money, engineers feeling the pain while handling “big bulls of mud” and anger because “the requirements have changed” and the technical decisions of the past became a heavy blocker instead of an enabler.
