4 ms·

I agree that the author has a webcentric view or experience gained primarily from web development. For most web apps the cost of an individual failure is essent

by dclusin 13y ago

I agree that the author has a webcentric view or experience gained primarily from web development. For most web apps the cost of an individual failure is essentially zero. In that sort of scenario tolerance of bugs is much higher so you can get away with playing fast and loose with process. If you look at industries where the result of a software failure is someone getting killed[1] then you will find lots of process. This process isn't there just for the sake of having process. It saves lives. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

greenyoda 13y ago
You don't even need to go as far as software that can kill people to find examples where bugs can be very expensive. A failure (wrong data, system down, etc.) in any software that a company depends on to operate its business can be very expensive to the company (e.g., a hotel can't take reservations for an extended period of time during a busy week, or a supplier sends a million-dollar piece of equipment to the wrong country). And it can also be very expensive for the software provider if their customer ditches them for a competitor's product.