3 ms·
Until recently, 'Waterfall' was used to describe a process anti-pattern. At least, it was prior to 2010 or so.Software engineers have known for decades that ite
by ap22213 11y ago
Until recently, 'Waterfall' was used to describe a process anti-pattern. At least, it was prior to 2010 or so.Software engineers have known for decades that iterative and incremental processes (spiral, UP, etc.) work best to manage risk, to prioritize important requirements, and to align with user goals. I'm not sure exactly when people started to use 'waterfall' as a real process.
Recently, I've started educating my team on OpenUP (a simplified RUP), and they were surprised by it. I guess they imagined that software management didn't exist before SCRUM.
- collyw 11y agoThere were plenty of successful projects written using waterfall. Not a great fit for all, but not an anti-pattern.
- ap22213 11y agoYou're just making things up now. Proof?
- riprowan 11y agoYour proof is found in the entire canon of software engineering prior to the late 1980s, when the concepts of "prototyping" and "RAD" became feasible. When code was written by hand with pencil and paper, then translated to punch cards, "prototyping" was an exorbitant amount of work. Moreover it added little value, as the first two entire generations of information systems were little more than electronic implementations of very-well-understood business processes. I studied systems analysis / engineering in the late 1980s. At the time, the entire paradigm of software engineering was waterfall, with the exception that the idea of prototyping was just getting started as something you could do iteratively in the "design / build" boundary.
- collyw 11y agoYou really think there were no successful software before Agile came along? https://www.quora.com/What-are-names-of-successful-projects-using-the-waterfall-model https://www.quora.com/What-are-names-of-successful-projects-...