> Iterative approach to software > development might seem as lack of "good initial design" to some > people, but I'm not aware of a better alternative.
Actually, "iterative approach", as typically practiced, is a misunderstanding of "agile". Agile is "incremental", where each step builds on the previous step. The classical iterative approach is to build it, test/debug it, fix it, then test/debug it and fix it again, and again, and again. On May 26, 2:13 am, Ali Chousein <ali.chous...@gmail.com> wrote: > Chris, yes, I said exactly that, but you got it completely wrong. My > understanding of "good initial design" Dan was referring to, was > software which can live for the next 30 years or something like that > (those are the words he used, he can correct me if he was trying to > mean anything else). I definitely wouldn't pay a penny to a software > which has been "designed" to live for the next 30 years. Talking about > houses, cars etc. you are mixing apples with oranges. The waterfall > model of software development is based on the experiences from such > industries. Even though waterfall could be a good approach for > developing software for avionics for example, in consumer electronics > it doesn't work. If you don't take the iterative approach to > developing software (short release cycles etc), you are out of > business from day one, because most probably you are developing things > that customers are not willing to pay. Iterative approach to software > development might seem as lack of "good initial design" to some > people, but I'm not aware of a better alternative. That's what I was > referring to and it never occurred to me that we were discussing > building houses or cars in this platform. > > On May 26, 3:33 am, "Christopher Van Kirk" > > <christopher.vank...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm sorry, did you actually just say "If you say 'it doesn't have good > > initial design', I would consider that as a plus instead of shortcoming"? > > > Really? > > > Are you also in the habit of purchasing houses with bad foundations, cars > > with broken chasses, and work animals with broken backs? > > > I've heard some crazy statements in my day, but this one has to be near the > > top of the list. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: android-developers@googlegroups.com > > > [mailto:android-developers@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ali Chousein > > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 6:27 AM > > To: Android Developers > > Subject: [android-developers] Re: Career as an Andoid developer. Is there > > any point? > > > Dan, you are looking from a very classical point of you. I mean the > > following: > > > 1. " how much impact these 'limiting decisions' will have in the future..." > > 2. " thanks to good initial design (or sometimes just clever emulation), are > > able to advance their platforms while still maintaining compatibility with > > apps that are 30 years old." > > > This apporach of initially designing everyhting, trying to think of every > > little detail, forecasting in the future etc. is dead in software > > development. It works in some classical industries like avionics, but in > > consumer electronics, forget it, you cannot build any decent product with > > this classical approach. (BTW, talking of forcasting, have you read the book > > 'The Black Swan'?) As others also mentioned, agile software development is > > the approach of building modern software, which can meet short time to > > market needs and changing requirements. Personally I don't see why Android > > is not capable of meeting changing requirements in the market. I have the > > impression that you have negative opinion of Android without even knowing > > much about the platform itself. Is your opinion based on hands- on software > > development experience on Android, or does it come from reading blogs > > (probably most of them written by foot soldiers of "that" company)? Sorry if > > I'm too blunt in asking such questions but you are talking very much in > > general terms without pinpointing any real shortcoming of the platform. If > > you say "it doesn't have good initial design", I would consider that as a > > plus instead of shortcoming, because I have better faith in teams which work > > agile, instead of waterfall. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
