The Pyramid Of The Waterfall Model Is Imminent, And Other Urban Myths
1669 WordsMar 7, 20177 Pages
The first article I selected focuses on the Waterfall method of software development, entitled “The Demise of the Waterfall Model Is Imminent” and Other Urban Myths. Authors P. Laplante and C. Neill, take a conversational, slightly cheeky approach to dispelling the prevailing thought that the application of the Waterfall method was in steady, rapid decline. The Waterfall method is characterized by a methodical but rigid five step process to developing software:
Each step is addressed completely before moving onto the next step, and once in a given step of the process, there is usually no going backwards. This method favors a disciplined approach to development,…show more content…
The second myth that the authors address is one relating to prototyping, a missing element of the Waterfall method. The prevailing thought is that prototyping offers an avenue to hasten the development process and can even minimize the number of errors. The authors go a step further in identifying a subset of prototyping that is more incremental in nature, characterized by improving one’s original prototype iteratively. This approach to prototyping means that it evolves over time, thus aptly named evolutionary prototyping. The authors draw a fine balance in weighing the benefits and costs associated with prototyping but ultimately, they reject that prototyping is necessary to increase the efficacy of the Waterfall method. They argue that unlike an engineering solution, software prototypes can be used in the final prototypes, thanks to evolutionary prototyping. Yet, prototyping does not necessarily correlate to decreased numbers of errors in programming. Their contention then is that the rigor built-in to the Waterfall method ultimately delivers a greater quality end-product beyond the operational properties of the software, which is something prototyping does not necessarily support.
The final myth postulated is that the Waterfall method is underappreciated as an industry best practice. The authors state that while a third of respondents cite it as the primary method of development, a slightly greater number of respondents