Back in the day (before open sourse became so prevalent), lots of software was designed from scratch with the minimal use of outside components and frameworks.
Today OSS frameworks (especially web frameworks) and libraries, PaaS, and Cloud provides you with an already baked-in design patterns. So there is less need in SW Architect and proper design.
Also, most of the Gang of Four patterns are just addressing the deficiences of OOP and older PLs, so if you're using a modern PL with closures/etc. there is no need in them.
EDIT:
Novadays a vast majority of design patterns are dealing with the complexities of microservices architecture, so if your product is a monolith then there is no need in them.
IMO the most useful design patterns are the ones dealing with error handling, reliability, and the essential complexity comming from the real world and human actors, not the self-inflicted accidental complexity comming from the bad design decisions. The good SW Architect should be able to help in avoiding that.
Back in the day (before open sourse became so prevalent), lots of software was designed from scratch with the minimal use of outside components and frameworks.
Today OSS frameworks (especially web frameworks) and libraries, PaaS, and Cloud provides you with an already baked-in design patterns. So there is less need in SW Architect and proper design.
Also, most of the Gang of Four patterns are just addressing the deficiences of OOP and older PLs, so if you're using a modern PL with closures/etc. there is no need in them.
EDIT:
Novadays a vast majority of design patterns are dealing with the complexities of microservices architecture, so if your product is a monolith then there is no need in them.
IMO the most useful design patterns are the ones dealing with error handling, reliability, and the essential complexity comming from the real world and human actors, not the self-inflicted accidental complexity comming from the bad design decisions. The good SW Architect should be able to help in avoiding that.