Alan B. Pearce wrote:
>>Nigel Duckworth wrote:
>>> Interesting page on how they manage code for the Space Shuttle;
>>>
>>> http://www.fastcompany.com/online/06/writestuff.html
>>
>>A great example of how NOT to develop software. Expensive, slow,
>>inefficient.
>
> I wouldn't say it is how not to develop it. As an example of how not to
> develop software, try the UK National Health Service software project, the
> UK Benefits system software, and IIRC the UK IRS software, all very large
> software projects that have gone way over budget, don't provide anything
> like the required functionality, and are at a point where they won't ever 
> do
> so. I suspect between them they have a far higher cost per line than the
> shuttle software, and won't ever work.

The fact that these other projects you mentioned are worse, don't make the 
shuttle group methodology acceptable. :)

I think the lesson here is to not let the government develop software, 
period. Any time you give an organization unlimited budget, you can be sure 
that lots of money will be wasted.

IMHO, a much better approach is to let companies bid on a project, and not 
allow the original bid to be altered (e.g., not give the company more money 
than it originally asked for). The most efficient organizations are small 
private companies.

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist