Slashdot Mirror
QA != Testing
gManZboy writes "Original author of Make and IBM Researcher, Stu Feldman has written an overview of what should be (but is sadly perhaps not) familiar ground to many Slashdotters: Quality Assurance. He argues that QA is not equivalent to 'testing', and also addresses the oft-experienced (apparent) conflict between QA-advocates and 'buisiness goals.'"
Let me be the first to quote Linus Torvalds: "Testing? What's that? If it compiles, it is good, if it boots up it is perfect."
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
..Slashdot editors could apply QA to the spelling in posted stories?
It's "business", not "buisiness".
Reminds me of my first programming job. For five years I worked for a boss, who only drew screenshots and then said: "Program this".
If you have read this comic before, you remember "QA Confidential." Funny, funny stuff.
If you haven't, the site is no longer up, but here's a mirror:
QA Confidential
Earn a free iRiver
The idea is to remove variation so that everything you do is always the same.
They introduced that in a company I once worked for. (Thankfully I'm out.) They did a big presentation to the whole company, telling us how wonderful it was going to be, and explaining that it wasn't about quality but consistency. A voice piped up from the back... "So if every bill goes out 18 months late, we win!"
A specification must be an MS Word document. You must have missed the memo on that.
-Peter
I'm always astonished at people's admonitions that you can't test or have quality assurance (or quality products, for that matter) without great requirements documents. Yet in 15 years in this silly business, I've never heard anyone say "We are very proud of our requirements documents. They serve our purposes perfectly, and we would do nothing to change them." Not once. ---Michael B.
QA Testers don't break software; it's broken when we get it.
Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
Right?