[AnAnonyCowherd]

> The problem is people design these things without any sort of actual testing in actual conditions where the software is supposed to be used.

I’ll do YOU one better. </Drax>

I work in an industry where software is still created by good, old-fashioned, by-the-book waterfall process, by outsourced developers. You know: the industry-proven, rock-solid, 20-year-out-of-date, slowest-and-least-agile methodology. Not only do the people who write the software never use it anger, they have no clue what the software is supposed to actually be doing. They don't understand our product, don't understand HOW these KINDS of products work, don't understand what engineers are doing TO the products, and don't understand what would be useful to have from software to help DO that. How many steps removed from actually USING the software is that? Well, you can imagine the frustration that end users experience on a DAILY basis, with ALL the tools they're supposed to be using, both home-grown, and customized commercial.

Gee… I wonder why there are so many shared Excel workbooks functioning as ad-hoc database applications on the network drives…

The most damning part of this is that there were some studies done on our engineering processes in relation to our competitors, and the numbers were bad. Really bad. You would think that senior management would sit up, take notice, and connect the dots. But they don’t seem to be doing that, which leads to one of two conclusions, and neither are encouraging.

[MetalGuru]

Sounds god awful. What industry do you work in?

[jmcdl]

I find it hard to understand how a business like this stays alive. Really, how?