YES! I'm 100% behind you. That is exactly what this tool is attempting
to do, make designing an application easier and a hell of a lot more
organized. It currently goes about 6-7 steps beyond what wireframes
offer, giving assistance for what needs to be accomplished next
depending on who you are. It's pretty damn useful, although it'll take
about 3 versions before it'll offer the 10-fold increase in
productivity.
As far as reducing people.... YES YES YES! No more project managers!
(Sorry guys) I boiled it down to:
Application Architects
FuseCoders
End-Users
The Boss
This may be right, it may be wrong. At this point it doesn't really
matter, we'll figure it out after giving it a try. I'm going to put the
finishing touches on this scaled down version and try and have something
next week to play with.
Steve
"Janty.com" wrote:
>
> -- snip --
> > The next problem would be very clear: "how can we reduce the
> > time it takes to do design?"
> -- snip --
> > I'm attempting to improve quality by
> > having programmers deliver what the client wants.
> -- snip --
>
> Well, that's the real problem in my opinion. The client never knows what
> they want until they can see what can be done, then they want more and more
> and .. then wouldn't it be cool if we could do this for them and, oh .. by
> the way, I'm sure you can do this too while you are at it ..... At that
> point, you risk falling into the never-ending software development project
> .... you know the one .. where the client changes their mind/adds new stuff 3
> times every day durring the development cycle.
>
> I don't see how you could speed this up. This is our 2nd version of this
> product. This time through, we didn't bother consulting them and decided to
> make a core set of components that we *know* they need. We are going to
> finish these and then release them and then add on new stuff while the
> client(s) use what we gave them and *then* tell us what they want/need.
> Still, we didn't find out what they *really* needed until after a lot of
> down time due to interviews, changed minds, and red tape in general.
>
> In my experience, the coding is the easy part. Trying to get out of these
> bozos *what* we need to code is the part that has caused the most delays.
> Software would always be perfect and easy to make and easy to use if it
> weren't for people ;) Now, if what you are working on will reduce that,
> then I'd be way less skepticle of shortening the conception-to-market cycle
> :)
>
> Todd
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Fusebox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:33 PM
> Subject: Re: Fwd: extreme programming
>
> > You might be right, but even if it did take 58 days of planning and 2
> > days of coding, we would have solved one problem, and caused another and
> > that's ok. The next problem would be very clear: "how can we reduce the
> > time it takes to do design?" I don't think that will be the case, this
> > tool isn't coming from revolutionary techniques, it just puts them all
> > together into a single application that can be track the application
> > through it's life cycle.
> >
> > Plus, I'm not only going for speed, I'm attempting to improve quality by
> > having programmers deliver what the client wants. Being skeptical is
> > perfectly fine, this is something that has been perceived as impossible
> > for about 50 years.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > "Janty.com" wrote:
> > >
> > > True .. but if the application and the documentation was *that*
> complete,
> > > the coding would technicly already be done. All it would require then
> would
> > > be to have some monkeys that can read, push the right keys and there you
> go.
> > > Sure it could be done in 2 days at that point, but I really don't think
> it
> > > would change the conception-to-completion time of the project that much.
> > > All it sounds like you would be doing is trading coding time for design
> time
> > > ... that's certainly a good idea, but I'm still convinced that the
> project we
> > > are working on would take 2 months ... 58 days planning and documenting
> and
> > > 2 days coding ;)
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Steve Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 1:32 PM
> > > > > To: Fusebox
> > > > > Subject: Re: Fwd: extreme programming
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Well my thinking is that the the 2 days would not actually begin
> until
> > > > > the specification was complete.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just like when building a house, you don't hire the contractor to
> build
> > > > > the house until the architect is finished drawing it.
> > > > >
> > > > > You'd be surprised at how fast you could build an application when
> it is
> > > > > down to that level of detail.
> > > > >
> > > > > Steve
> > >
> > >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
