JP says he's been quiet for a bit. Good for us because when he's back, it's with a bang!
Go read this, for me nicely summed up with:
"Using Agile, you feel insecure (-ish, especially if you’ve not tried it before) at the start of a project, and satisfied at the end. Using Waterfall you feel good at the start and crap at the end. If there is an end."
Actually, kind of puzzling that waterfall method for software implementation / development still exist - software is after all a model of something:
A 1:32 scale model of "QE II" or a "Ferarri Dino" and I would have no problem with waterfall.
But software models something truly iffy - human behaviour included. Modelling it would be more like art - a representation of reality enhancing the important issues and downplaying the not-so-important details dynamically changing as it moves forward towards completion.
I would not think an artist would ever contemplate waterfall... Jasper Johns do sum up his reality nicely.
Agile feels right and makes sense... How cool is that!
And JP's post is wonderful!!
And... LOVE Jasper Johns orientation!!!
Posted by: Sheamus | December 11, 2006 at 15:03
Waterfall is dead. Agile will rule expecially with Gen Xer's starting to dominate the workforce.
Posted by: Micheal Craig | February 04, 2007 at 04:45
Many companies are starting to feel the full effects of the wasted time and opportunities that comes with following the waterfall method. Craig Larman once said that software development is not predictive manufacturing and he is dead right.
Abandon waterfall!
http://thebusinessanalyst.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Micheal Craig | February 04, 2007 at 04:48
Micheal, the problem is often that most "big" systems like legacy ERP systems, even BPxx systems requires waterfall. They're not built for anything but a comprehensive all-included implementation on the first shot.
And with waterfall comes a side-effect: You end up mapping ways and means as they are today, no experimenting, no using IT for what it's worth to create new ways... and in best case you end up with 3% efficiency increase, never a "factor of ten" upside when doing things in new ways. Sigh :)
Posted by: sig | February 04, 2007 at 13:35