3 ms·
Big companies with lots to lose will always use a waterfall process. Facebook can move fast and break things because there's little risk to them, but fintech, l
by mimixco 8y ago
Big companies with lots to lose will always use a waterfall process. Facebook can move fast and break things because there's little risk to them, but fintech, legal, military, and medical software will always require peer review and a waterfall process. When I was a mainframe programmer at IBM, it was the waterfall process that protected customers from untested code and, as a result, you don't hear much about giant hacks or thefts in things like bank accounts, Social Security checks, or industrial manufacturing. That's because the suppliers of those programs don't want to move fast and break things. They want to move slowly and be sure that software works, to the best of their ability, before shipping.
- sandrobfc 8y agoI don't think that Agile is always about being more risky. Sure, Waterfall is a safe way to go in most projects, but what about the possible losses in costs and effort that may come from it? However, I do get your point regarding safety for the client itself, that don't want to risk shipping an "unfinished" product.
- mimixco 8y agoIt is inherently risky in that it encourages shipping first and fixing stuff later. This is the opposite of what you do with something like someone's bank account. (Yes, ETH Solidity developers, I'm talking to you.) I absolutely love the agile process and I'm a big believer in pair programming, which was part of the original doctrine but is hardly mentioned today. That being said, no one is smart as all of us and there are inevitably things in your code which you (two) as developers won't immediately discern. Waterfall, though protracted and boring, is crucial for identifying and fixing those problems before they ship.