How to write requirements for this?
-
I recently got ragged on by a very senior MD (they have lots) for changing the development language from VB to C#, he cannot read C#, has trouble with the syntax. The development team however have not complained.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
I'm soo glad my boss can't read C#. He just wants to see a working app. It can be threatening, because come review time, he totally disregards any work done that isn't demonstrable, but it also allows me to demo a shallow prototype, and then get kinky with cool tech like LINQ behind the scenes.
-
I was going through a preliminary design session with a client who kept saying the application has to be configurable. Me: OK, tell me what that means to you? Client: I have to be able to change the application without calling you. Me: That's fine. What things would you like to be able to change? Client: I don't know what I want to change, I just know I want to change it. :omg: :wtf: I'm glad the weekend is coming.
only two letters away from being an asset
That's just a specific instance of the general principle that customers don't know what they want until you first deliver something that's not what they want. :laugh:
Kevin
-
I'm soo glad my boss can't read C#. He just wants to see a working app. It can be threatening, because come review time, he totally disregards any work done that isn't demonstrable, but it also allows me to demo a shallow prototype, and then get kinky with cool tech like LINQ behind the scenes.
Brady Kelly wrote:
cool tech like LINQ
Linq is the greatest dissapointment of all the tech in 2005+, I envisaged such things as do select type statement against a List<>/datatable joined. Being able to update a list without the foreach, having a unified result set that I can bind to a list control. Don't get me started on Linq was a POS. I know TSQL very well and would never replace writing procs with Linq so it has almost no application with what I do. As for the boss, he recently asked about WPF/Silverlight wanting to know if it had any application in our shop, I took great glee informing him that these things require a DESIGNER and promptly described the difference. Having said that I am looking into WPF.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
1. Find an old copy of Access 2000 lying around. 2. Hand it to him. 3. Back slowly out of the room. 4. Bill him $10k for delivering *configurable* software. 5. Drink. 6. Bill monthly maintenance fee 7. Repeat step 5.
only two letters away from being an asset
1. Find an old copy of Access 2000 lying around. 2. Hand it to him. 3. Back slowly out of the room. 4. Bill him $10k for delivering *configurable* software. 5. Drink. 6. Bill monthly maintenance fee 7. Repeat Go to step 5.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^] -
1. Find an old copy of Access 2000 lying around. 2. Hand it to him. 3. Back slowly out of the room. 4. Bill him $10k for delivering *configurable* software. 5. Drink. 6. Bill monthly maintenance fee 7. Repeat Go to step 5.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^]Gary R. Wheeler wrote:
6. Bill monthly maintenance fee
OOO! Dangerous! The client might start insisting he fix the bugs in Access 2000, and MS couldn't be bothered to do that... :~
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. This message is made of fully recyclable Zeros and Ones
-
I was going through a preliminary design session with a client who kept saying the application has to be configurable. Me: OK, tell me what that means to you? Client: I have to be able to change the application without calling you. Me: That's fine. What things would you like to be able to change? Client: I don't know what I want to change, I just know I want to change it. :omg: :wtf: I'm glad the weekend is coming.
only two letters away from being an asset
I once supported a payroll package that was totally configurable. The package enabled you to modify screens and reports (of course), add columns to standard tables, add new tables and relationships, own programming language (sort of Assembler meets COBOL) to insert code for events, etc. It was way flexible. Give them something like that, huge maintenance income potential.
Bob Emmett
-
Brady Kelly wrote:
cool tech like LINQ
Linq is the greatest dissapointment of all the tech in 2005+, I envisaged such things as do select type statement against a List<>/datatable joined. Being able to update a list without the foreach, having a unified result set that I can bind to a list control. Don't get me started on Linq was a POS. I know TSQL very well and would never replace writing procs with Linq so it has almost no application with what I do. As for the boss, he recently asked about WPF/Silverlight wanting to know if it had any application in our shop, I took great glee informing him that these things require a DESIGNER and promptly described the difference. Having said that I am looking into WPF.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Be prepared to tear out a lot of hair :P Its great when it's working, but when it isn't, XAML is the worst thing in the world to debug. And if you want your applications to look decent, yes, definitely get a designer.
-
He seriously asked of I could teach him how to use VS. X|
only two letters away from being an asset
Mark Nischalke wrote:
teach him how to use VS
THAT comes up waaaay too often in my experience. It's surprising and amazing and there's probably a lot you can say on the subject. The best answer to give to a question like that is an emphatic, authoritative and resounding NO. Nothing more- just no. And add in a dramatic pause before you deliver the pearl of wisdom.
<>< :: have the courage to use your own reason
-
Brady Kelly wrote:
cool tech like LINQ
Linq is the greatest dissapointment of all the tech in 2005+, I envisaged such things as do select type statement against a List<>/datatable joined. Being able to update a list without the foreach, having a unified result set that I can bind to a list control. Don't get me started on Linq was a POS. I know TSQL very well and would never replace writing procs with Linq so it has almost no application with what I do. As for the boss, he recently asked about WPF/Silverlight wanting to know if it had any application in our shop, I took great glee informing him that these things require a DESIGNER and promptly described the difference. Having said that I am looking into WPF.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
No offense, but you should spend a bit more time with LINQ before making these statements. LINQ can do everything you "envisaged" and then so MUCH more. I can't tell you the last time I wrote a for each statement. I recommend Ratz's "Pro LINQ" book to learn about the extension methods that drive LINQ. I don't ever use the "sql like syntax" of LINQ, instead learn to use the extension methods themselves and the clouds will part. LINQ really is that cool. Secondly, we have written many production applications (line of business) with Silverlight and WPF and used a designer on very few of them. There are plenty of places to get some nice-looking XAML templates.
-
Just sell him a copy of Visual Studio. That way he can configure things as he pleases.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E. Comport Computing Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
Exactly, give him a price for the source code and developer's guide. If they don't have the knowledge or resources to develop, point them to some books, codeproject.com, and some good resources to put together a development box. Don't forget to give them a cost breakdown for you to do changes, they will probably need it.
-
Computafreak wrote:
Well that's simple. Make a plugin application which loads an assembly. Make one of the default plugins a compiler which automatically adds a reference to your application. Depending on how much you hate them, give them the C++/CLI compiler VB compiler; if you like them, let them use the C# compiler
FTFY
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. This message is made of fully recyclable Zeros and Ones
-
I was going through a preliminary design session with a client who kept saying the application has to be configurable. Me: OK, tell me what that means to you? Client: I have to be able to change the application without calling you. Me: That's fine. What things would you like to be able to change? Client: I don't know what I want to change, I just know I want to change it. :omg: :wtf: I'm glad the weekend is coming.
only two letters away from being an asset
Requirements every user wants but can't define: 1. Must be user-friendly. 2. Must be configurable. 3. Must run fast. 4. Must be scalable.
-
FTFY? MD = medical doctor?
Fixed That For You You see it a lot round here...
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. This message is made of fully recyclable Zeros and Ones
-
I was going through a preliminary design session with a client who kept saying the application has to be configurable. Me: OK, tell me what that means to you? Client: I have to be able to change the application without calling you. Me: That's fine. What things would you like to be able to change? Client: I don't know what I want to change, I just know I want to change it. :omg: :wtf: I'm glad the weekend is coming.
only two letters away from being an asset
It’s not that difficult; it’s just another requirement that falls under the heading of “non-functional requirements”, as in: ... The online response time should not exceed 2 seconds. Just seeing it in print (for starters) in the “Requirements” document, will make the user happy. Subsequently, all these “configurable” options will fall out in the design; like “connection strings”; logging options; etc. which are placed in an (XML) configuration file and can be edited with any XML editor. “Configurable” also means that if the “system fonts”, date format, etc. are changed via the Control Panel, the application “inherits” the changes.
-
It’s not that difficult; it’s just another requirement that falls under the heading of “non-functional requirements”, as in: ... The online response time should not exceed 2 seconds. Just seeing it in print (for starters) in the “Requirements” document, will make the user happy. Subsequently, all these “configurable” options will fall out in the design; like “connection strings”; logging options; etc. which are placed in an (XML) configuration file and can be edited with any XML editor. “Configurable” also means that if the “system fonts”, date format, etc. are changed via the Control Panel, the application “inherits” the changes.
Friday frustration has long past and the post was never meant to be serious question of how. It's like to trying to explain a joke, the humor is lost when you have to break it down.
only two letters away from being an asset
-
No offense, but you should spend a bit more time with LINQ before making these statements. LINQ can do everything you "envisaged" and then so MUCH more. I can't tell you the last time I wrote a for each statement. I recommend Ratz's "Pro LINQ" book to learn about the extension methods that drive LINQ. I don't ever use the "sql like syntax" of LINQ, instead learn to use the extension methods themselves and the clouds will part. LINQ really is that cool. Secondly, we have written many production applications (line of business) with Silverlight and WPF and used a designer on very few of them. There are plenty of places to get some nice-looking XAML templates.
r2musings wrote:
I don't ever use the "sql like syntax" of LINQ
I think that may be my problem, I have such a long history with SQL syntax I automatically fall into this trap. Tried to use AND between 2 where statements yesterday :-O. Thanks for the recommendation of the book, I really need to start from scratch and probably treat Linq as a complete new language set. I have no doubt that it will be part of the future. As for WPF/Silverlight I'm not convinced it is the future UI platform. I'll stick to winforms for a couple more years yet.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
-
I was going through a preliminary design session with a client who kept saying the application has to be configurable. Me: OK, tell me what that means to you? Client: I have to be able to change the application without calling you. Me: That's fine. What things would you like to be able to change? Client: I don't know what I want to change, I just know I want to change it. :omg: :wtf: I'm glad the weekend is coming.
only two letters away from being an asset
Ask if he/she can point to another app that provides the sort of things he/she has in mind. If they can't then maybe get another client :sigh: If its a flexible UI (a'la VS) then that should be doable providing you've got the budget for one of the better UI Control libraries. But if they want to get their power station control system to do word processing, then they probably need to know that it ain't gunna happen.
Multi famam, conscientiam pauci verentur.(Pliny)
