What challenges do software engineers face when using tools and frameworks for application development?

This can be a bit tedious especially when building on top of an existing codebase or migrating to an entirely different tool, like a database, for example, migrating from SQL to a NoSQL. Right out of the bat, there's a difference in data structure and requirements. One of the key ways in trying to make it a bit bearable is identifying and documenting the models that are important or need special attention. By cataloging the intricate data models and prioritizing crucial components, you can ensure a smoother transition, mitigating the risks of data loss and maintaining data integrity. Using a new tool or framework is at risk of certain compatibility issues, but identifying and knowing how to navigate through them, reduces the headache.

The most fundamental problem is to set the expectations. You can't solve the world hunger problem with the first release. Fail fast should be the way forward and design should be in Agile based feedback models. From POC to MVP for review should be done within a couple of sprints. Once you have people aligned to your framework post demo, you have to work with them to deliver alpha and beta releases to assure you have a guarantee of adoption. There is no point designing any framework which is for educational purposes. Success of the framework doesn't depend only on how genetic it is but also how it's getting adopted.

This part of the article is misleading - a tool or framework is only eligible for consideration IFF it supports the programming language, operating system, browser or database already in place or mandated by other factors. If it does not, it's not compatible, and it is also out of consideration. Doesn't mean that compatibility is not an issue, but it is NOT what is given by example here.

The best way to learn is to practice. Learning as you go can help make the process a bit less daunting and it's possible to get you up to speed on how it works more quickly. Engaging with the tool or framework in real projects speeds up understanding and can help bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical implementation, facilitating a smoother transition

The learning curve is a factor and this is a fine and very generic description of the learning curve. But it is hardly a challenge in what we face when using tools or a framework for application development - the learning curve will be considered when selecting a tool or framework, and the learning curve is an accepted and understood piece of the equation. If it is considered at all, the advice should be - is the documentation stellar? Is there help and support available? At what cost and timeframe? Is the source code available for modification or at least inspection?

Um, installation, configuration and maintenance are just part of the deal. So this section ought to focus on what to look for that addresses this overhead. Merely highlighting it is a challenge is redundant. It does insidiously introduce a real concern and challenge - the risk of errors, bugs or security issues.

We use tools to increase effectiveness and efficiency. We use them to reduce efforts in development, or V&V and testing; or we may use them to automate activities. Before we use a tool, we need to qualify the tool, to assess if it is able to meet our needs. If we later discover that the tool is unable to (consistently) meet our needs, we have wasted time, effort and resources (money!) acquiring something that cannot be used. So it makes sense to spend some time and effort while tool shopping to qualify the tool. Determine why you need the tool. Determine if the tool can meet those needs. Test it with representative data. Comprehensive tests should prove if it is suitable for use, and can produce the expected results consistently.

I have used a tool which has a long-time known error that may occur to the project file type generated by the tool. Once the error affects the project type, you have to re-do all your code customization, layout arrangements and other configurations. This is in addition to other known errors that have never been documented by the vendor of the tool. This can be such a drawback for legacy projects.

As challenging as adopting new tools and frameworks might be, it's important to always stay up to date to avoid redundancy in your application, and with proper planning and access to comprehensive documentation, including tutorials, guides, and API references, it significantly eases the learning process and enables efficient utilization of the tool or framework's features.

Status quo by the stakeholders. Developers may have to restrict themselves to the tools that have been provisioned for by the stakeholders, specifically at the top level management. It poses a great challenge when there is no room for adjusting tool preferences.

This article is poorly constructed. It does not explain why these 6 challenges are selected, or make clear how they interrelate. Or which one to give more weight to, and that within this process of settling on a tool or framework there are trade-offs. Overall I don't think this article as it stands adds much to the discipline of Software Engineering. The tone is condescending and regurgitates common concepts and ideas (and explanations) that boil down to - here are 6 challenges - go figure it out. Engineering discipline requires that not only are the challenges illuminated and clearly articulated, but include an exposition of best practices dealing with those challenges, with details and evidence that they work, and how they work.