3 ms·

Google Testing Blog: There, but for the grace of testing, go I

20 points by jnoller 16y ago

dboyd 16y ago
> Certain features like making and receiving calls, texting and so forth are used more often than taking pictures or searching maps. I find that surprising. Maybe I'm just an edge case. I rarely make or receive calls on my 'phone' (maybe 2-3 times a month). Texts are much more common; at least 5 times a week. Maps, however, are probably daily. My phone is basically a calendar, mapping, suggestion device.
- Mz 16y ago
  I also rarely make phone calls. I use my phone as a clock (including alarm clock) so much more than as a phone that I sometimes have a slip of the tongue and call it "my clock". :-D Other features I use a lot: calculator and calendar. I'm not a texter (at least not yet).
- andreyf 16y ago
  I use my phone as a map a lot more than I do to make phone calls. Heck, I use the compass app more than I do make calls.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
pasbesoin 16y ago
I find a lot of small bugs are indicative of poor analysis and/or execution. I know to look out for the whoppers due to similar reasons. The better developers and projects demonstrate a uniformity of quality. (A project can hose over a good developer when it wrests control from them and/or hides needed information from them.) There are less small scale bugs because there's been due time for consideration and a concern for getting things right. Often, there has been a deliberate reduction in features -- the developers have learned what truly matters and -- given outright or de facto the ability to do so -- have stripped away the rest. They may leave the design open enough to add things in the future as need is demonstrated. But they don't fuck around with them now. There may still be some whoppers -- I've found some under such circumstances. But they are less likely. And when there are, hidden as they may initially be, they stand out more upon identification. And fixing them, for all of their deeper implications, still tends to be easier. It's a lot easier to concentrate and do deep work, when you're not busing swatting a thousand mosquitoes. Applying quality more strongly and uniformly at the front end pays off in this manner. The work goes deeper and solves more fundamentally and insightfully the problem that's really at hand. And when it needs to pivot -- I guess that's the current buzz word -- it's not held down by a thousand tiny tendrils, each on it's own insignificant, but accumulating with the tenacity of Velcro.

20 points by jnoller 16y ago

dboyd 16y ago

> Certain features like making and receiving calls, texting and so forth are used more often than taking pictures or searching maps. I find that surprising. Maybe I'm just an edge case. I rarely make or receive calls on my 'phone' (maybe 2-3 times a month). Texts are much more common; at least 5 times a week. Maps, however, are probably daily. My phone is basically a calendar, mapping, suggestion device.

Mz 16y ago
I also rarely make phone calls. I use my phone as a clock (including alarm clock) so much more than as a phone that I sometimes have a slip of the tongue and call it "my clock". :-D Other features I use a lot: calculator and calendar. I'm not a texter (at least not yet).
andreyf 16y ago
I use my phone as a map a lot more than I do to make phone calls. Heck, I use the compass app more than I do make calls.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

pasbesoin 16y ago

I find a lot of small bugs are indicative of poor analysis and/or execution. I know to look out for the whoppers due to similar reasons. The better developers and projects demonstrate a uniformity of quality. (A project can hose over a good developer when it wrests control from them and/or hides needed information from them.) There are less small scale bugs because there's been due time for consideration and a concern for getting things right. Often, there has been a deliberate reduction in features -- the developers have learned what truly matters and -- given outright or de facto the ability to do so -- have stripped away the rest. They may leave the design open enough to add things in the future as need is demonstrated. But they don't fuck around with them now. There may still be some whoppers -- I've found some under such circumstances. But they are less likely. And when there are, hidden as they may initially be, they stand out more upon identification. And fixing them, for all of their deeper implications, still tends to be easier. It's a lot easier to concentrate and do deep work, when you're not busing swatting a thousand mosquitoes. Applying quality more strongly and uniformly at the front end pays off in this manner. The work goes deeper and solves more fundamentally and insightfully the problem that's really at hand. And when it needs to pivot -- I guess that's the current buzz word -- it's not held down by a thousand tiny tendrils, each on it's own insignificant, but accumulating with the tenacity of Velcro.