That is a damn fine blog post. Very well said...
Testing is essentially "evaluating a product via experimentation". While experimentation certainly requires plenty of scientific rigor, it also requires plenty of creativity, as well. And trying to standardize creativity is unwise. There simply is no "one size fits all" way to test. Extended, or not.
This. Mod parent up.
In (very) short, "testing is evaluating a product via experimentation" (see http://www.satisfice.com/blog/...). According to this definition, truly anyone can test. Anyone can "evaluate a product via experimentation".
However, formal, professional testing also has a purpose: to inform. That is, "testing provides information about the quality of a product so that others can make informed decisions."
So, formal, professional testing is "evaluating a product via experimentation - in order to inform". And
Sadly, not everyone thinks like you.
By using words like "internationally agreed" (instead of "locally agreed" or "internationally begrudgingly accepted") and "standard" (implying "the way", and not "a way"), ISO/IEC/IEEE strikes fear into the following, unthinking leaders of companies, who then force the workers to...begrudgingly implement and comply with the "internationally agreed standards".
Anyway, I don't believe that something like testing can be standardized anyway. There simply is no "one size fits all" way to test. "Internationally agreed", or not.
Mod parent up.
http://www.developsense.com/bl... is a treasure-trove of testing (and other) information. Simply reading his (and similar) blogs is an quick, easy, and effective (and free!) way to learn about testing. Also, be sure to check out the blog of James Bach for the same reasons: http://www.satisfice.com/blog/.
Companies can't do anything. But, people that run companies can. And people that run companies might be leading, thinking, reasonable people. But, very often, they're following, reacting, unreasonable people. People that will blindly follow "standards" simply because they're called "standards". And other people that report to those people must implement and live by those "standards". Even if the "standards" hinder, instead of help.
Some wonder how the ISO/IEC/IEEE achieved consensus without their input. James Bach speculates that exclusion helped build consensus. Others, such as Iain McCowatt, argue that something as variable as software testing cannot be standardized, at all. And others believe that the motive behind the standards is not increased quality, but economic benefit, instead. Michael Bolton explains “rent-seeking” as he builds on James Christie’s CAST 2014 presentation, “Standards – promoting quality or restricting competition?”. A comprehensive list of many other arguments, viewpoints, and information has been collected by Huib Schoots. Opponents of ISO 29119 have even started a petition aimed at suspending publication of the standard.
Even so, this might be an losing battle. Gil Zilberfeld thinks that companies will take the path of least resistance and accept ISO 29119.
So, where do you stand? What constitutes a consensus? Can a standard be honored without consensus? Can an inherently sapient activity, such as testing, be standardized, at all? What is the real purpose of a standard? Will companies acquiesce and adopt the standard without question?"
The document spells out the 10 common design flaws in a straightforward manner, each with a lengthy explainer of inherent weaknesses in each area and how software designers and architects should take these potential pitfalls into consideration."
Link to Original Source
This sounds a bit like Sega Channel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_Channel). I was one of the morons subscribers back in the day. Unfortunately, actual did not equal expected. I thought I'd have access to a lot of fun and popular games. In fact, they provided neither.
This tastes the same.
Wonderful stuff. Reminded me of this site: http://www.informationisbeauti... (beautiful ways to view typically boring stuff).
What is your experience and opinion on the many Donkey Kong clones, like Congo Bongo, Crazy Kong, Konkey Kong, Monkey Kong, Donkey King, or even Popeye?
FWIW, aside from "satisfaction", the other pieces of my "compensation pie" are "salary" (+raise/bonus), "benefits", "time-off", and "investment options".
In the past 2 years, I've been at 5 companies and taken 2 pay cuts. All voluntary.
My “compensation pie” is made up of many pieces. Only one of them is salary. The piece of the pie that was sorely missing was "satisfaction" ("happiness", "contentment").
After 2 years, I finally found a company that *wants* me (my skills and what I have to offer), and actually allows me to contribute. This helps fill my "satisfaction" piece of my "compensation pie”.
You need to figure out your own pie pieces, and the size/importance of each.
Meanwhile, I'm confident enough in my abilities that I'm not too worried about future salaries.