5 ms·

Waterfall is dead? I missed that memo!

by hartror 16y ago

jemfinch 16y ago
Waterfall was DOA. People have just been trying to bring it to life for forty years.
- kenjackson 16y ago
  Except for the fact that almost everything we use was built with waterfall. From the CPU/GPU to the OS to my browser and most of my apps... almost all were likely built with waterfall. Outside of a few websites, I don't think the full on TDD/Agile blitz has built much.
  - AndrewDucker 16y ago
    You'd be surprised. A lot of companies are using Agile nowadays. And finding it more efficient than waterfall.
  - jemfinch 16y ago
    > almost all were likely built with waterfall. Stop using weasel words. Find real, confirmed examples or keep mum. "Likely" isn't worth a rebuttal.
    - kenjackson 16y ago
      How about the worlds most populat OSes, Windows, Linux, BSD. Mozilla, Chrome browsers. Android, iOS, and WinCE. Word, Excel, Quicken, TurboTax, Photoshop, iLife.
      - newt 16y ago
        In what way is chrome's development waterfall? http://adtmag.com/articles/2010/07/30/is-google-going-agile.aspx http://adtmag.com/articles/2010/07/30/is-google-going-agile.... And firefox? http://www.developer.com/open/article.php/3860226/Mozilla-Firefox-Gets-More-Agile-with-Lorentz.htm http://www.developer.com/open/article.php/3860226/Mozilla-Fi... Those were the first 2 that I googled. I'm sure that some of them are not agile, most likely by default - e.g. the older Microsoft ones, before MS or anyone else discovered agile. But honestly, all you are doing is throwing out names of popular programs without any idea if they are agile or not, and then claiming success on the ones that no-body refutes. After that behaviour, the burden of proof is on you - back each one up with references or go away. It would be interesting if you found major projects that evaluated both agile and waterfall and still chose waterfall or deliberately changed to a less agile process, instead of the other way. Rather than just software written before the people involved knew what agile was.
        kenjackson 16y ago
        Both projects you site have assets that are indicative of waterfall. Specs, designs, and dot releases. The only TDD tests I've seen in either project are related to the language specs -- and there the specs were written first. Agile doesn't simply mean shorter release cycles, although in both articles that's how its used. Iterative waterfall methods result in shorter release cycles. The key diffs to know the difference: 1) Do you get requirements up-front for a release cycle? The length of the cycle doesn't matter. Can be 1 week or 6 months. 2) Do you have specs for the major features? 3) Do you design up front or do you write tests first? 4) Do you have a big test pass before release? These are the main diffs in the way waterfall and agile manifests. Honestly, the only people I know who use Agile are hacks. Every time I've seen anyone try to demonstrate it, it is a disaster. IMO, its the most embarrassing movement in software engineering.
        newt 16y ago
        I don't think that you know agile that well. If you define agile as "hacks" then it's no surprise that only hacks will match your definition of agile. "requirements for a (short) release cycle" is a good description for a scrum sprint backlog. Scrum or agile does not say that you can't have "Specs, designs, and dot releases" in some form if you need them.
        kenjackson 16y ago
        I use these specific definitions for agile as they are the ones that come up as real differentiators in practice. Of course Agile by itself is virtually a meaningless term that often simply means, "we're going to release more often", but really doesn't say anything about the SLC per se.
      - jemfinch 16y ago
        Android? Mozilla? Chrome? Bullshit. Confirm your examples. I want reports from developers saying, "We used waterfall to produce this software." You're the one making the claim, now produce some real evidence.
        kenjackson 16y ago
        You're the one that said waterfall was DOA. I want exhaustive proof that waterfall died and has never been alive, hence no product has ever used it. Once you prove your assertion, then I will present my evidence.
        jemfinch 16y ago
        > You're the one that said waterfall was DOA. Yes, specifically because it was invented as a strawman to be knocked down. It was defined as a dead and useless development methodology.
        newt 16y ago
        Once you prove your assertion, then I will present my evidence No, please, be the bigger man and go first. heh.
    - jemfinch 16y ago
      Why am I getting downvoted? Someone makes a claim without any support and gets upvoted, and I call him on it and get downvoted? Did reddit change its color to orange?
      - newt 16y ago
        I agree with you totally, but maybe the wording or formatting was what people saw first. What works sometimes is not just calling "bullshit" on a shoddy post but going the extra mile that the shoddy post didn't.

Waterfall is dead? I missed that memo!

by hartror 16y ago

Waterfall is dead? I missed that memo!

jemfinch 16y ago

Waterfall was DOA. People have just been trying to bring it to life for forty years.

kenjackson 16y ago
Except for the fact that almost everything we use was built with waterfall. From the CPU/GPU to the OS to my browser and most of my apps... almost all were likely built with waterfall. Outside of a few websites, I don't think the full on TDD/Agile blitz has built much.
- AndrewDucker 16y ago
  You'd be surprised. A lot of companies are using Agile nowadays. And finding it more efficient than waterfall.
- jemfinch 16y ago
  > almost all were likely built with waterfall. Stop using weasel words. Find real, confirmed examples or keep mum. "Likely" isn't worth a rebuttal.
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    How about the worlds most populat OSes, Windows, Linux, BSD. Mozilla, Chrome browsers. Android, iOS, and WinCE. Word, Excel, Quicken, TurboTax, Photoshop, iLife.
    - newt 16y ago
      In what way is chrome's development waterfall? http://adtmag.com/articles/2010/07/30/is-google-going-agile.aspx http://adtmag.com/articles/2010/07/30/is-google-going-agile.... And firefox? http://www.developer.com/open/article.php/3860226/Mozilla-Firefox-Gets-More-Agile-with-Lorentz.htm http://www.developer.com/open/article.php/3860226/Mozilla-Fi... Those were the first 2 that I googled. I'm sure that some of them are not agile, most likely by default - e.g. the older Microsoft ones, before MS or anyone else discovered agile. But honestly, all you are doing is throwing out names of popular programs without any idea if they are agile or not, and then claiming success on the ones that no-body refutes. After that behaviour, the burden of proof is on you - back each one up with references or go away. It would be interesting if you found major projects that evaluated both agile and waterfall and still chose waterfall or deliberately changed to a less agile process, instead of the other way. Rather than just software written before the people involved knew what agile was.
      - kenjackson 16y ago
        Both projects you site have assets that are indicative of waterfall. Specs, designs, and dot releases. The only TDD tests I've seen in either project are related to the language specs -- and there the specs were written first. Agile doesn't simply mean shorter release cycles, although in both articles that's how its used. Iterative waterfall methods result in shorter release cycles. The key diffs to know the difference: 1) Do you get requirements up-front for a release cycle? The length of the cycle doesn't matter. Can be 1 week or 6 months. 2) Do you have specs for the major features? 3) Do you design up front or do you write tests first? 4) Do you have a big test pass before release? These are the main diffs in the way waterfall and agile manifests. Honestly, the only people I know who use Agile are hacks. Every time I've seen anyone try to demonstrate it, it is a disaster. IMO, its the most embarrassing movement in software engineering.
        newt 16y ago
        I don't think that you know agile that well. If you define agile as "hacks" then it's no surprise that only hacks will match your definition of agile. "requirements for a (short) release cycle" is a good description for a scrum sprint backlog. Scrum or agile does not say that you can't have "Specs, designs, and dot releases" in some form if you need them.
        kenjackson 16y ago
        I use these specific definitions for agile as they are the ones that come up as real differentiators in practice. Of course Agile by itself is virtually a meaningless term that often simply means, "we're going to release more often", but really doesn't say anything about the SLC per se.
    - jemfinch 16y ago
      Android? Mozilla? Chrome? Bullshit. Confirm your examples. I want reports from developers saying, "We used waterfall to produce this software." You're the one making the claim, now produce some real evidence.
      - kenjackson 16y ago
        You're the one that said waterfall was DOA. I want exhaustive proof that waterfall died and has never been alive, hence no product has ever used it. Once you prove your assertion, then I will present my evidence.
        jemfinch 16y ago
        > You're the one that said waterfall was DOA. Yes, specifically because it was invented as a strawman to be knocked down. It was defined as a dead and useless development methodology.
        newt 16y ago
        Once you prove your assertion, then I will present my evidence No, please, be the bigger man and go first. heh.
  - jemfinch 16y ago
    Why am I getting downvoted? Someone makes a claim without any support and gets upvoted, and I call him on it and get downvoted? Did reddit change its color to orange?
    - newt 16y ago
      I agree with you totally, but maybe the wording or formatting was what people saw first. What works sometimes is not just calling "bullshit" on a shoddy post but going the extra mile that the shoddy post didn't.