http://www.yourdonreport.com/index.php/2006/06/02/good-enough-reconsidered/ Blogging the impact of computer-related technology trends, and whatever else catches my interest. Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:22:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.yourdonreport.com/index.php/2006/06/02/good-enough-reconsidered/comment-page-1/#comment-27385 Bad Enough - The Yourdon Report - Blogging the impact of computer-related technology trends, and whatever else catches my interest. Sat, 12 Jan 2008 01:59:29 +0000 http://yourdon.com/personal/blog/?p=89#comment-27385 [...] (see, for example, this recent post about the “good enough” nature of Twitter, and this somewhat older one of a more general nature), but it occurred to me that I should acknowledge the opposite end of the [...] [...] (see, for example, this recent post about the “good enough” nature of Twitter, and this somewhat older one of a more general nature), but it occurred to me that I should acknowledge the opposite end of the [...]

]]> http://www.yourdonreport.com/index.php/2006/06/02/good-enough-reconsidered/comment-page-1/#comment-1531 The Yourdon Report » Blog Archive » What can software engineers learn from the Facebook flap? Sun, 10 Sep 2006 13:34:28 +0000 http://yourdon.com/personal/blog/?p=89#comment-1531 [...] The second most impressive thing Zuckerberg and his colleagues did was to fix the mistake, muy pronto. Of course, they could have retreated completely by removing the code, and reverting to the previous version of their software; but instead, it appears that they introduced some user-controllable options that should have been there in the first place — i.e., options that allow each Facebook customer to control which of his personal attributes (likes, dislikes, single/”involved” relationship status, etc.) can be shared, and which ones cannot. I don’t know how much code was involved, and I don’t know how well it was written, and I don’t know how well they tested it - but getting all of that specified, designed, coded, tested, and deployed in two days is pretty good. Well, in any case, it’s probably “good enough,” from the perspective of the 700,000 grumpy users who thought the whole thing was a bad idea. [...] [...] The second most impressive thing Zuckerberg and his colleagues did was to fix the mistake, muy pronto. Of course, they could have retreated completely by removing the code, and reverting to the previous version of their software; but instead, it appears that they introduced some user-controllable options that should have been there in the first place — i.e., options that allow each Facebook customer to control which of his personal attributes (likes, dislikes, single/”involved” relationship status, etc.) can be shared, and which ones cannot. I don’t know how much code was involved, and I don’t know how well it was written, and I don’t know how well they tested it – but getting all of that specified, designed, coded, tested, and deployed in two days is pretty good. Well, in any case, it’s probably “good enough,” from the perspective of the 700,000 grumpy users who thought the whole thing was a bad idea. [...]

]]> http://www.yourdonreport.com/index.php/2006/06/02/good-enough-reconsidered/comment-page-1/#comment-786 The Yourdon Report » Blog Archive » Ed Foster on the Source of Bad Software Wed, 16 Aug 2006 02:38:46 +0000 http://yourdon.com/personal/blog/?p=89#comment-786 [...] If you haven’t heard of this concept before, you may well have a strong negative reaction to it. I first started writing about good-enough software about 10 years ago, and I posted a blog entry about it a couple months ago; you can even find a Wikipedia article on the “principle of good enough.” Bottom line: mediocre software survives because society tolerates it, and believes (rightly or wrongly) that it really is good enough. [...] [...] If you haven’t heard of this concept before, you may well have a strong negative reaction to it. I first started writing about good-enough software about 10 years ago, and I posted a blog entry about it a couple months ago; you can even find a Wikipedia article on the “principle of good enough.” Bottom line: mediocre software survives because society tolerates it, and believes (rightly or wrongly) that it really is good enough. [...]

]]>