How many times in a day do you say...
-
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
-
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
Christopher Duncan wrote:
...do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you?
Hardly at all, if ever. Must be something in the water.
"Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for, in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it." - Ellen Goodman
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
I go through the same thing. And I find that when I use unnamed *nix systems my aggravation goes up exponentially beyond what it where it's typically at when dealing with Windows stupidities.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
Oh, but you see, automated testing rules the world at now. The great plan is to hire developers to be SDETs and drop the whole concept of STEs out of the picture. Now, this is obviously not a slam against developers, but professional test people often have a different mentality and a different focus about how and what to test in software. Developers who haven't learned to think like testers are generally looking for ways to prove the code works, not for sneaky little ways the code can be broken. And what developers who become SDETs aren't thinking about aren't going to get developed into test automation, either. Automation is not the best answer. It's PART of the answer. Use automation to test the heck out of things; it's great to take repetitive tasks out of everyone's hair. But remember that automation only tests what it's designed to test. Ad-hoc testing and manual testing shouldn't be relegated to a few hours of a bug-bash. There should still be hands-on, professional testers running tests every day. That's where you'll uncover user experience problems, issues that come up because of a change in timing or sequence, or the things that come up because of plain ol' human fumble-fingers. Dogfooding DOES happen, and for the big stuff it's mandatory, company-wide, at some point (usually Beta 1/ Beta 2 timeframe). But the bar at which they fix bugs goes up, too.
Caffeine - it's what's for breakfast! (and lunch, and dinner, and...)
-
I go through the same thing. And I find that when I use unnamed *nix systems my aggravation goes up exponentially beyond what it where it's typically at when dealing with Windows stupidities.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
Jim Crafton wrote:
And I find that when I use unnamed *nix systems my aggravation goes up exponentially
Yeah, but you can't really get mad at the Penguins. They're giving it to you for free (a concept I still just don't understand, but bless their tuxedo wearing little souls just the same). My irritation is for stuff that's supposed to be professional quality, and hence I bear no ill will towards well intentioned hobbyists. Further, many of my paid upgrades are at gunpoint. They don't do anything for me feature wise that would compel me to buy it on my own. However, because I'm in the biz, I have to stay current anyway (Vista is just the most recent expenditure of that sort). And yeah, I'm cranky today. Who wants to know? :-D
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
-
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
Christopher Duncan wrote:
Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them.
Yeah, that gets me scratching my head too. Other than that it's usually bumping up against a
sealedclass. :mad: -
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
Christopher Duncan wrote:
Man, but I miss Borland.
Me too! That used to be one hell of an outfit and put "that company in Remond, that shall remain nameless" to utter shame. Mike
Semper Fi http://www.hq4thmarinescomm.com[^]
-
Christopher Duncan wrote:
Man, but I miss Borland.
Me too! That used to be one hell of an outfit and put "that company in Remond, that shall remain nameless" to utter shame. Mike
Semper Fi http://www.hq4thmarinescomm.com[^]
Smart enough not to get into operating systems too.
-
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
Christopher Duncan wrote:
I miss Borland
I hope it's because you miss Turbo Pascal. I remember installing Borland C++ 4, and it wouldn't run at all out of the box. You had to download a huge patch to 4.02 before the damn thing would even start.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^] -
Christopher Duncan wrote:
I miss Borland
I hope it's because you miss Turbo Pascal. I remember installing Borland C++ 4, and it wouldn't run at all out of the box. You had to download a huge patch to 4.02 before the damn thing would even start.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^]From 4.0 on, Borland was on the downward spiral and had ceased to be relevant. What I miss was Turbo C++ 1.0. :-D
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
-
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
-
I find that I rarely have a day that doesn't go by without my exclaiming, multiple times, "Man, you guys suck!" This is typically directed at the people who developed the software I use, and most often is a large corporation in Redmond who shall remain nameless. In the interest of fairness, I've rarely worked in a shop where they truly took the time and spent the money on resources (aka Professional Testers) necessary to release a well tested, if not bulletproof app. But then, none of these companies have had the pure, raw horsepower available to them that a multi-billion dollar organization, staffed with (alledgedly) world class techies, has at their disposal. In short, when you dominate the market and have no excuses about not having the money or staff to do it right, there's just no excuse for the kinds of things I see on a regular basis. Never mind compilers that are less stable than the apps under development. I'm talking about basic, common functionality. Unpinned docking windows that display anyway until you pin and then unpin them. Word processors that don't display formatting properly unless you resize the window or do something to else refresh it. There's just no way that this stuff could have been even used moderately, let alone tested, before someone asked me to give them money for it. Eating their own dog food? I seriously doubt that. And I just happen to have a domain expert handy on the topic. I mean, really. Give me your billions, I'll fire 3/4 of your middle management, spend the money on techies and testers and not only deliver quality but improve the company's bottom line. But I digress. Is it just me (go ahead, someone has to say it :)), or do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you? Man, but I miss Borland.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Coming soon: Got a career question? Ask the Attack Chihuahua! www.PracticalUSA.com
Christopher Duncan wrote:
do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you
Yes, but it's usually my code that's untested :-D
-
Christopher Duncan wrote:
do the rest of you spend your days frequently cursing the people who foist such obviously untested software on you
Yes, but it's usually my code that's untested :-D
Testing in a controlled environment is pointless; the only worthwhile way to test is to put it into production. OK, OK, I'm really just bemoaning the lack of a test system here; this place is not only willy, it's nilly as well. :-O
-
Testing in a controlled environment is pointless; the only worthwhile way to test is to put it into production. OK, OK, I'm really just bemoaning the lack of a test system here; this place is not only willy, it's nilly as well. :-O
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
Testing in a controlled environment is pointless; the only worthwhile way to test is to put it into production
As quoted by the Microsoft advocate :) *sigh
