Every time you see someting like this popping up, there is the usual talk about "taking over the desktop" and comparisons with Windows are being made. Why?
In my opinion, windows has already won the desktop, and it won't go away for quite some time, at least not until we have a quality RAD environment (kylix?).
Second, windows may be nice and small, fitting on one disk (actually....has anyone here seen win2k advanced server? 4 disks!) but windows doesn't give me compilers, quality web servers, a dozen languages (hey, I have a complete internet development environment in ONE box! Try that, Microsoft!!). It's all about choice, but choice is something the microsoft crowd has forgotten about.
First of all, I do not claim to hold all wisdom, but I do know my share of methodologies to design systems and to ensure quality.
First of all, ANY consultant who dares to tell you one method is right for every situation is telling lies.
Second of all, anyone who tell you methodologies are a waste of time or money is telling lies.
Fird, people who tell you the managers/programmers/consultants/... are to blame for a failed implementation are telling lies.
A lot of people here on slashdot are coders. Not software engineers, just coders. They hack something together and hey, it works, or if it doesn't, they'll fix it until it works. No design, no documentation, no formal ways of working. This is okay when you are the only one who works on a piece of software. For a large project, this is a recipe for disaster (as somepeople on here have pointed out).
Some people on here are software engineers. They write code that people's lives depend on. I remember seeing an article here on/. about 6 months ago about the control software for the space shuttle. A bugless program. Programmed by people who use formal methods, good documentation and don't pull all-nighters fixing that last bug.I suggest some people here might read Code Complete and After the Goldrust, both by Steve McConnell.
When implementing a quality system or other method, keep in mind there are many different sakeholders. Management, programmers, the consultants etc. It is all these people who are responsible for a succesfull or failed implementation.
Final note to the persons who think ISO900X is about products... it is not. It is about processes, and in an even larger framework, it is about organisations. This is quite an abstract concept, and a lot of people will not grasp this concept. (On a side note: how many people here REALLY grasped Design Patterns?) That is okay, it is management's job to think in broad lines, to explain matters like these to the workers. If management fails, implementation is doomed.
Slashdot Mirror
In my opinion, windows has already won the desktop, and it won't go away for quite some time, at least not until we have a quality RAD environment (kylix?).
Second, windows may be nice and small, fitting on one disk (actually....has anyone here seen win2k advanced server? 4 disks!) but windows doesn't give me compilers, quality web servers, a dozen languages (hey, I have a complete internet development environment in ONE box! Try that, Microsoft!!). It's all about choice, but choice is something the microsoft crowd has forgotten about.
First of all, ANY consultant who dares to tell you one method is right for every situation is telling lies.
Second of all, anyone who tell you methodologies are a waste of time or money is telling lies.
Fird, people who tell you the managers/programmers/consultants/... are to blame for a failed implementation are telling lies.
A lot of people here on slashdot are coders. Not software engineers, just coders. They hack something together and hey, it works, or if it doesn't, they'll fix it until it works. No design, no documentation, no formal ways of working. This is okay when you are the only one who works on a piece of software. For a large project, this is a recipe for disaster (as somepeople on here have pointed out).
Some people on here are software engineers. They write code that people's lives depend on. I remember seeing an article here on /. about 6 months ago about the control software for the space shuttle. A bugless program. Programmed by people who use formal methods, good documentation and don't pull all-nighters fixing that last bug.I suggest some people here might read Code Complete and After the Goldrust, both by Steve McConnell.
When implementing a quality system or other method, keep in mind there are many different sakeholders. Management, programmers, the consultants etc. It is all these people who are responsible for a succesfull or failed implementation.
Final note to the persons who think ISO900X is about products... it is not. It is about processes, and in an even larger framework, it is about organisations. This is quite an abstract concept, and a lot of people will not grasp this concept. (On a side note: how many people here REALLY grasped Design Patterns?) That is okay, it is management's job to think in broad lines, to explain matters like these to the workers. If management fails, implementation is doomed.