| Adventures in Software Quality | Home · FAQ · Resources |
In the news...Students arrested for confusing the list and scalar contexts in Perl.
What were they (Microsoft) thinking?
I was recently reminded that web testing differs considerably from traditional client-server testing, and that I've really only done web testing. I just ran across several articles over at stickyminds.com that elaborate on these differences:
posted by Stan Taylor on 1/29/2001 05:04:34 PM When I start testing a new project or begin a new round of testing on a project, I first do a quick round of testing on the areas that I know, from experience, are likely to be buggiest or are likeliest to contain the most severe bugs. As James Bach explains in a new article at stickyminds.com, this is 'exploratory testing.' Read more in his essay: "What is Exploratory Testing?".
From the W3C: What is a good standard?An essay on W3C's design principles
From "Why Software Still Sucks," an interview with Jaron Lanier: "I think it should be inconceivable that the kind of person who writes one kind of software also writes another kind," Lanier says. "Basically, if you heard your brain surgeon also had a tattoo parlor, you'd probably demur. Right now we think of them as the same thing. We think it's perfectly all right for people to go back and forth. I don't think it is." posted by Stan Taylor on 12/19/2000 09:37:09 AM Short but sweet article: Evaluating Tools: A Five-step Process for Comparing, Evaluating, and Choosing the Right Tool.
I am all for automating software, but this article points out some sensible limitations to this mentality.
Now here is one company that clearly understands its competitive advantage!
According to many, the recent presidential election may indeed hinge on a usability bug.
|
|
© 2000 Stan Taylor. All Rights Reserved.