[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Week 30 report of Knut Yrvin. Week 31 plans

tirsdag 27 juli 2004, 12:17, skrev Andreas Schuldei:
> iso 9001 is a killer. been there, done that. its only use is to
> find someone to blame, not solutions. it creates lots of work
> without benefits. if we try to become iso-9001 compliant we wont
> get anything done at all but be only absorbed in following rules.
> not even microsoft does it.

That was the situation until 4 years ago. ISO 9001 was a waterfall 
oriented approach with documentation bureaucracy in mind, not the 
product and the proecess getting able to make a good product. Five 
years ago the ISO 9001 was compleatly reorganized to support 
incremental development of software. When I write "documented in an ISO 
9001-way", i refer to the modernized version that is incorporated in 
the transformed ISO-model: 


Unfortunately gives it noe meaning to refer on what Microsoft does. 
Microsoft has their own development process called Microsoft Solutions 
Framework. This methodes don't even take users of the applications in 
consideration when they develop a product. The classic paper: Bridging 
the gap between the developers and users by Jonathan Grudin. First in 
developing Windows 2003 Microsoft had some user involment in the 
requerment spesification. This was done with large costumers - and what 
this implicates for all of the small users of the user of Windows 2003. 
Even more interessting. Microsoft did take some users in consideration 
after 28 years of doing buiseness selling software products. I want 
even comment on their quality process :-). 


Method vise the question now is how the software development processes 
can be improved by learning from free software development: 


Our task is to use this to both get the best from the free software 
development processes, and fix whats missing when doing participatory 




Reply to: