Waterfall, what ya fail

Here is an article against the myth of Waterfall Model, which is still commonly used and considered as correct standard in enterprise software development projects in Hong Kong.

Don’t draw diagrams of wrong practices - or: Why people still believe in the Waterfall model

Comments

スロ / Bernat said…
So what's the other method?

Implementing then specificating?
Testing before coding? xD

I'm serious, what's the problem with this method?
Teki Chan said…
Rational Unified Process is much better because it is iterative and incremental.

The main problem is that we cannot practically complete a task in a phase. Software Development needs iterative and incremental process instead of sequential process as Waterfall.

I know that a modified Waterfall Model is added with iteration but it does not solve its sequential process problem.

See detail at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_Unified_Process
Anonymous said…
As a comment to bernat: Yes, testing before coding is actually a very good practice, even though you mention it as a joke.

See the wikipedia article for more information.

Also, building the architecture as the needs grow is a central agile practice. And most user-centric design approaches emphasize the importance of iterative design with frequent user feedback, which means that you need to implement something in order to refine your specifications.
Teki Chan said…
Hi Tarmo Toikkanen,

Thanks for your opinion. You raised a very good point - Iterative Refinement.

Popular posts from this blog

Event: Developer Productivity Engineering: What's in it for me?

Ethical Hacking 101

Mark Six Analyst