Search Results

Search found 778 results on 32 pages for 'usability'.

Page 19/32 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • Feeling Old? Before Middleware, Gamification, and MacBook Airs

    - by ultan o'broin
    Think we're done with green screens in the enterprise apps world? Fusion User Experience Advocate Debra Lilley (@debralilley) drew my attention to this super retro iPad terminal emulator app being used by a colleague to connect to JDE. Yes, before Middleware, this is how you did it. Surely the ultimate in hipster retro coexistence? Mind you, I've had to explain to lots of people I showed this to just what Telnet and IBM AS/400 are (or were). MochaSoft TN5250 Terminal Emulator iPad App This OG way of connecting to apps is a timely reminder not to forget all those legacy apps out there and the UX aspect to adoption and change. If a solution already works well and there's an emotional attachment to it, then the path to upgrade needs to be very clear and have valuable and demonstrable ROI for users and decision makers, a path that spans emotion and business benefits. On a pure usability front, that old school charm of the character-based green glow look 'n' feel could be easily done as a skin, personalizing an application for the user so that they feel comfortable with it. Fun too particularly in the mobile and BYOD space! In fact, there is a thriving retro apps market out there as illustrated by this spiffy lunar lander app (hat tip: John Cartan), part of a whole set of Atari's greatest hits available for iOS. Lunar Lander App And of course, there's the iOS version of Pong. Check out this retro Apple Mac SE/30 too. I actually remember using one of these. I have an Apple Mac Plus somewhere in my parents' house. I tried it out recently, and it actually booted, although all it was good for was playing the onboard games. Looking at all these olde worlde things makes me feel very old, but kinda warm inside too. The latter is a key part of today's applications user experience too.

    Read the article

  • Why We Need UX Designers

    - by Tim Murphy
    Ok, so maybe this is really why I need UX designers.  While I have always had an interest in photography and can appreciate a well designed user interface putting one together is an entirely different endeavor.  Being color blind doesn’t help, but coming up with ideas is probably the biggest portion of the issue.  I can spot things that just don’t look like they work right, but what will? UX designers is an area that most companies do not spend much if any resources.  As they say, you only get one chance to make a first impression and and a poorly designed site or application is a bad first impression.  Given that they you would think that companies would invest more in appearance and usability. One of two things need to be done to rectify this issue.  Either we need to start educating our developers on user experience and design or we need to start finding ways to subsidize putting full time designers on our project teams.  Maybe it should be a time share type of situation, but something needs to be done.  As architects we need to impress on our project stakeholders the importance of User Experience and why it should be part of the budget.  If they hear it often enough eventually they may present it to you as their own idea. del.icio.us Tags: User Experience,UX,Application Design

    Read the article

  • xubuntu install on p4

    - by adi
    Hello i am thinking of installing xubuntu on a dell gx260 pentium 4 pc with: 1.8GHz processor 64mb integrated video card(had other but it died on me) 1GB of RAM Ive installed lubuntu but im not enjoying it since i can not make shortcuts of partitions or folders on desktop for faster usability(i dont want them on my bar, want them on desktop) also the buggs i seen on it made me reconsider of using lubuntu:mplayer not working, no video was working,chromium outdated etc and i dont want to stay all day to find solutions over the internet. And seen on internet from xubuntu that theyve had shortcuts for theyre partitions on desktop, and is more attractive.(can some1 tell me if with xubuntu u can make shortcuts on desktop, i mean the shortcuts remain after reboot) 1 more thing to add:at installing lubuntu when it asked me where to install it only showed me the entire hard drive(i have 3 partitions on it) and made me select the size of the lubuntu partition from 1 that the installer wanted.(from local disk D: from windows xp view),need to mention that i have windows xp on the machine which is on local C:, kept my downloads on local D:, and other stuff on E:. I want an ubuntu distro which would work fine especially for internet purpose. Can someone lend me a hand on this?

    Read the article

  • Personal wiki on usb / the cloud?

    - by drby
    I'm looking for a personal wiki that can be installed on an usb stick and (more importantly) somewhere on the cloud (dropbox). I've looked at the Wiki Matrix, but I really don't care that much about any of the options, so I end up with a choice between ~50 wikis at the end. Tried out TiddlyWiki but there are some things that really annoy me like the fact that all pages get opened on the same page. It really looks like it'd turn into a giant mess pretty quickly. I'd like to have something that's pretty close in terms of appearance and usability to wikipedia. Hierarchical categories for organization would be really nice. And accessible storage (in case I ever want to convert it to something else).

    Read the article

  • Oracle Financial Management Analytics 11.1.2.2.300 is available

    - by THE
    (guest post by Greg) Oracle Financial Management Analytics 11.1.2.2.300 is now available for download from My Oracle Support as Patch 15921734 New Features in this release: Support for the new Oracle BI mobile HD iPad client. New Account Reconciliation Management and Financial Data Quality Management analytics Improved Hyperion Financial Management analytics and usability enhancements Enhanced Configuration Utility to support multiple products. For HFM, FCM or ARM, and FDM, we support both Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server database. Simplified Test to Production migration of OFMA. Web browsers support for Oracle Financial Management Analytics: Internet Explorer Version 9 - The Oracle Financial Management Analytics supports the Internet Explorer 9 Web browser (for both 32 and 64 bit). Firefox Version 6.x - The Oracle Financial Management Analytics supports the Firefox 6.x Web browser. Chrome Version 12.x - The Oracle Financial Management Analytics supports the Chrome 12.x Web browser. See OBIEE Certification Matrix 11.1.1.6:  http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/middleware/ias/downloads/fusion-certification-100350.html Oracle Financial Management Analytics Compatibility: The Oracle Financial Management Analytics supports the following product version: Oracle Hyperion Financial Data Quality Management Release 11.1.2.2.300 Oracle Financial Close Manager Release 11.1.2.2.300 Oracle Hyperion Financial Management Release 11.1.2.2.300  

    Read the article

  • Oracle Launches Mobile Applications User Experience Design Patterns

    - by ultan o'broin
    OK, you heard Joe Huang (@JoeHuang_Oracle) Product Manager for Oracle Application Development Framework (ADF) Mobile. If you're an ADF developer, or a Java (yeah, Java in iOS) developer, well now you're a mobile developer as well. And, using the newly launched Applications User Experience (UX) team's Mobile UX Design Patterns, you're a UX developer rockstar too, offering users so much more than just cool functionality. Mobile Design Pattern for Inline Actions Mobile design requires a different way of thinking. Use Oracle’s mobile design patterns to design iPhone, Android, or browser-based smartphone apps. Oracle's sharing these cutting edge mobile design patterns and their baked-in, scientifically proven usability to enable Oracle customers and partners to build mobile apps quickly. The design patterns are common solutions that developers can easily apply across all application suites. Crafted by the UX team's insight into Oracle Fusion Middleware, the patterns are designed to work with the mobile technology provided by the Oracle Application Development Framework. Other great UX-related information on using ADF Mobile to design task flows and the development experience on offer are on the ADF EMG podcast series. Check out FXAer Brian 'Bex' Huff (@bex of Bezzotech talking about ADF Mobile in podcast number 6 and also number 8 which has great tips about getting going with Android and iOS mobile app development too.

    Read the article

  • Tracking feature requests for small-scale components

    - by DXM
    I'm curious how other development teams (especially those that work in moderate to large development groups) track "future" features/wishlists for functionality for internally developed frameworks or components. I know the standard advice is that a development team should find one good tool for tracking bugs/features and use that for everything and I agree with that if the future requests are for the product itself. In my company we have an engineering department, which is broken up into multiple groups and within each there can be one to several agile teams. The bug tracking product we use has been "a leader since 1997" (their UI/usability seems to also be evaluated against that year even today) but my agile team or even group doesn't really control what is being used by the whole department. What we are looking to track is not necessarily product features but expansion/nice to have functionality for internal components that go into our product. So to name a few for example... framework/utility library on top of CppUnit which our developers share low-level IPC communications framework Common development SDK that myself and several other team leads started to help share some common code/tools at the department-wide level (this SDK is released as internal "product" to each of the groups). Is the standard practice to use the one bug tracking tool? Or would it make more sense to setup something more localized specifically for our needs and maintain it ourselves? It's also unclear how management will feel if developers start performing "IT" roles of maintaining software and servers. At the same time, right now, we use excel files, internal wiki and MS OneNote for this kind of stuff and that just doesn't feel right. (I'm afraid to ask for actual software recommendations, since that might make this question more localized or something. Also developers needs this way more than management, so it would be nice to find something either free or no more than the cost of a happy hour).

    Read the article

  • System testing - making sure the system conforms to specification. Validation?

    - by user970696
    After weeks of research I have nearly completed my thesis, yet I am unable to clear up my confusion contained in all previous threads here (and in many books): During system testing, we check the system function against system analysis (functional system design) - but that would fit to a definition of verification according to many books. But I follow ISO12207, which considers all testing as validation (making sure work product meets requirement for intended use). How can I justify that unit testing or system testing is validation, even though when I check it against specification? Which fullfils the definiton of verification? When testing that e.g. "Save button" works, is it validation? This picture shows my understanding of V&V, so different from many other sources, including ISTQB etc. Essential problem I have is that a book using the same picture also states on another place that: test activities in the area of validation are usability, alpha and beta testing. For verification, testable system requirements are defined whose correct implementation can be tested through system tests. Isn't that the opposite of what the picture says? Most books present the following picture, where validation is just making sure that customer needs are satisfied. Mind you that according to ISO, validation activity is testing.

    Read the article

  • What should a developer know before building a public web site?

    - by Joel Coehoorn
    What things should a programmer implementing the technical details of a web site address before making the site public? If Jeff Atwood can forget about HttpOnly cookies, sitemaps, and cross-site request forgeries all in the same site, what important thing could I be forgetting as well? I'm thinking about this from a web developer's perspective, such that someone else is creating the actual design and content for the site. So while usability and content may be more important than the platform, you the programmer have little say in that. What you do need to worry about is that your implementation of the platform is stable, performs well, is secure, and meets any other business goals (like not cost too much, take too long to build, and rank as well with Google as the content supports). Think of this from the perspective of a developer who's done some work for intranet-type applications in a fairly trusted environment, and is about to have his first shot and putting out a potentially popular site for the entire big bad world wide web. Also: I'm looking for something more specific than just a vague "web standards" response. I mean, HTML, JavaScript, and CSS over HTTP are pretty much a given, especially when I've already specified that you're a professional web developer. So going beyond that, Which standards? In what circumstances, and why? Provide a link to the standard's specification. This question is community wiki, so please feel free to edit that answer to add links to good articles that will help explain or teach each particular point. To search in only the answers from this question, use the inquestion:this option.

    Read the article

  • How can I make a vpn network login the default behavior for logging into Windows?

    - by Danny
    To login to the machine, I have to login to our domain. When I am at work, the unauthenticated wireless permits access to the domain. However, the internet is not available until I connect via the vpn. From home, I have to connect via the vpn first, then I can login to the domain. I have successfully setup a network logon with the vpn (following the directions found here). And for the most part it works correctly. (There is an issue with logout/login I haven't figured out just yet). As I currently have to Switch User and select the Network Login button, I'd like to know if it is possible to have the network login the default behavior when logging into the system. This is mostly a usability issue than anything else.

    Read the article

  • Oracle Tutor - Is Anyone Reading Your Documentation?

    - by mary.keane
    If you are responsible for documenting your business practices, wouldn't it be nice to know if anyone is using the documentation? If the employees find it useful? You might want to consider surveying the users of the documentation on a regular basis. There are a number of free survey tools online (search for "free survey tools"), and you can have a survey ready in a matter of minutes. It's as simple as gathering a list of questions and a list of email addresses. For the questions, here are some suggestions. How often do you access the policy and procedure site? How useful is the site? How easy is it to navigate the site? How often are your questions answered on the site? What suggestions do you have to make the site more useful? You may want to consider just asking a few questions each month so that employees can complete the survey in less than 5 minutes (you'll get more responses). Make sure you have several comment boxes in the survey so that the employees can give suggestions. As the users of your documentation, the employees may have some terrific ideas that will enhance the usability of your policy and procedure site. It would be great to hear your suggestions for how to survey the users of your documentation. Mary R. Keane Senior Development Manager, Oracle BPM and Tutor

    Read the article

  • Why is Desktop Unity using the global application menu?

    - by Kazade
    It was announced in another question that the desktop version of Unity will keep the global menu by default. Here are the facts: The global menu was introduced into UNE to save vertical screen space because at Netbook resolutions the vertical space is limited. On a modern desktop with a high resolution, there is ample vertical space making this unnecessary On the announcement of UNE global menus, Mark Shuttleworth himself said the following: "There are outstanding questions about the usability of a panel-hosted menu on much larger screens, where the window and the menu could be very far apart." The benefits of a global menu don't seem to carry across to a high-resolution desktop and instead seem to bring draw backs (increased mouse travel, large distance between the menu and its associated window). The other worrying factor is that applications seem to be moving away from having a menu bar, and instead of innovating on this and defining new guidelines for moving away from the menu, we are giving it prime place right at the top of the desktop. If applications continue moving away from the desktop we will have an inconsistent experience concerning where to locate application related options/tools depending on which app you are using (e.g. Chrome). Finally, the current global menu bar implementation doesn't work for all apps, and doesn't even work for all apps in the default install. This means that the default desktop implementation will be inconsistent. So, there are a bunch of reasons why moving to a global menu is a bad idea, so we need some pretty convincing arguments for why it is a good idea. What are the reasons for the global menu implementation in the desktop version of Unity?

    Read the article

  • When to use each user research method

    - by user12277104
    There are a lot of user research methods out there, but sometimes we get stuck in a rut, conducting all formative usability testing before coding, or running surveys to gather satisfaction data. I'll be the first to admit that it happens to me, but to get out of a rut, it just takes a minute to look at where I am in the design & development cycle, what kind(s) of data I need, and what methods are available to me. We need reminders, or refreshers, every once in a while. One tool I've found useful is a graphic organizer that I created many years ago. It's been through several revisions, as I've adapted it to the product cycles of the places I've worked, changed my mind about how to categorize it, and added methods that I've used or created over time. I shared a version of this table at the 2012 International UPA conference, and I was contacted by someone yesterday who wanted to use it in a university course on user-center design. I was flattered at the the thought, but embarrassed, because I was sure it needed updating -- that was a year ago, after all. But I opened it today, and really, there's not much I'd change -- sure, I could add some nuance regarding what types of formative testing, such as modality (remote, unmoderated remote, or in-person) or flavor of testing (RITE, RITE-Krug, comparative, performance), but I think it's pretty much ok as is. Click on the image below, to get the full-size PDF. And whether it's entirely "right" or "wrong" isn't the whole value of looking at these methods across the product lifecycle. The real value lies in the reminder that I have options. And what those options are change as the field changes, so while I don't expect this graphic to have an eternal shelf life, it's still ok a year after I last updated it. That said, if you find something missing or out of place, let me know :) 

    Read the article

  • What's new at Oracle in Gamification?

    - by erikanollwebb
    It's been a crazy few weeks in Apps UX.  We are actively working on some gamification designs in now 4 different application product areas, as well as supporting some teams in other areas of Oracle.  Since that gets to be a pretty diverse group with a lot of resources and ideas, we've started a group in the Oracle Social Network on Gamification at Oracle.  That's limited to internal users at Oracle, but if you are interested in joining,  ping me directly for more information at [email protected]. We're planning another design jam like we did here at Oracle in May and at the Enterprise Gamification Forum in San Diego in September.  This time, we're taking the show to the UK, and hosting it with a group of customers on the Oracle Usability Advisory Board.  It should be a great event!   We're also actively designing some gamified flows which we'll be testing with users at the UKOUG to see what our customers think about some of our gamification ideas. We're looking at more feedback opportunities.  Internally, we surveyed 444 folks within Oracle about gamification and we'll be posting some of our findings on that here soon.  I'll be posting a blog on gamification for our customers at useableapps.oracle.com  in the next few weeks and I'll cross-post to here when it comes out.  So even though it's been quiet on this blog, we are busy and I'm hoping to push out more content in the next few weeks!  Would love to know what's most interesting to the folks reading so if there's something you especially want to see, feel free to comment or email me about it.

    Read the article

  • Oracle Worldwide Product Translation Group and Applications User Experience Working Together

    - by ultan o'broin
    The Applications User Experience (UX) Mobile team has been extending its ethnographic research to even more countries. Recently, the team conducted research in Sweden, and I am pleased to say I made the connection for the UX team with the Oracle's Worldwide Translation Product Group (WPTG) local (that is, in-country) language specialists. It struck me that WPTG's local market knowledge and insight that we heard about at an Oracle Usability Advisory Board meeting in the UK in 2011 would be very valuable to the UX efforts while, at the same time, UX could afford WPTG an opportunity to understand our design and development direction so that linguistic resources (terminology, style guides, translatability guidelines, and so on) for any translation of our mobile solutions could be prepared in advance. Brent White of the Mobile UX team takes notes as ethnography participant Capri Norman uses mobile technology to work in Stockholm. Pic credit: Oracle Applications UX. The UX team acknowledges Capri's kind permission to use this image. I'm told by Brent White of the Mobile UX team that the co-operation was a big success.  A WPTG Swedish language specialist joined a couple of ethnographic sessions, taking great notes and turning them around very fast for the UX team. And of course, a great local insight into Swedish culture and ways of working was provided too, along with some nice socializing!  More research in more countries is planned. Watch out for future blog posts and other communications about this great co-operation worldwide.

    Read the article

  • SEO and links content

    - by AntonAL
    For usability purposes, entire article thumbnail is wrapped to a link. <a href="/some_article"> <h2>Article title</h2> <div class="summary">Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet</div> </a> User needs to click on any place of a thumb and it will be redirected to article. Does this approach have some negative effect to SEO ? Another question: What is more valueable for Search Engine ? Just a link to article in articles list <a href="/article1">Article 1</a> <a href="/article2">Article 2</a> <a href="/article3">Article 3</a> Or h2, wrapped to link: <a href="/article1"><h2>Article 1</h2></a> <a href="/article2"><h2>Article 2</h2></a> <a href="/article3"><h2>Article 3</h2></a>

    Read the article

  • Testing of visualization projects

    - by paxRoman
    We develop small to large visualization projects for different tasks and industries and sometimes while rewriting them a couple of times in the process we hit walls because we discover that we need to add a lot of code to support new requirements. Now we have established a design process that seems to work well (at least we reduced the development time for each new project quite a bit), but we're still left scratching our heads around this question: what exactly should we test when testing visualizations? If everything that we want to explore is on the screen (bounded visualizations)? If the data is ok - if data is valid (that's one of the nice things about visualizations you can spot errors in your datasets)? Usability? User interaction? Code quality? I can tell you for sure that a simple check of the code quality is certainly not enough! Is there a classic paper / book about how to test visualizations? Also do you happen to know about classic design patterns for visualizations (except the obvious ones like Pub-Sub)?

    Read the article

  • Modular Database Structures

    - by John D
    I have been examining the code base we use in work and I am worried about the size the packages have grown to. The actual code is modular, procedures have been broken down into small functional (and testable) parts. The issue I see is that we have 100 procedures in a single package - almost an entire domain model. I had thought of breaking these packages down - to create sub domains that are centered around the procedure relationships to other objects. Group a bunch of procedures that have 80% of their relationships to three tables etc. The end result would be a lot more packages, but the packages would be smaller and I feel the entire code base would be more readable - when procedures cross between two domain models it is less of a struggle to figure which package it belongs to. The problem I now have is what the actual benefit of all this would really be. I looked at the general advantages of modularity: 1. Re-usability 2. Asynchronous Development 3. Maintainability Yet when I consider our latest development, the procedures within the packages are already reusable. At this advanced stage we rarely require asynchronous development - and when it is required we simply ladder the stories across iterations. So I guess my question is if people know of reasons why you would break down classes rather than just the methods inside of classes? Right now I do believe there is an issue with these mega packages forming but the only benefit I can really pin down to break them down is readability - something that experience gained from working with them would solve.

    Read the article

  • Google Analytics: How long does it take users to trigger an event

    - by Stephen Ostermiller
    I implemented Google Analytics event tracking on my currency conversion website. The typical user flow is: User lands on a page about two currencies. User enters an amount to be converted. The site shows the user the value in the other currency. The JavaScript sends Google Analytics an "converted" event when the currency conversion is done. Because most of the sessions on my site are single page, the event tracking is very important to me to be able to know if users find my page useful. I'm looking for a way to be able to figure out how long it typically takes users to enter a value in the form. I expect that this data would form a bell curve with around a specific amount of time after page load. If I can't get a graph, I could make do with a median value. I would like to be able to use this as a core metric around usability testing. Is there a way to get this information out of Google Analytics?

    Read the article

  • tdd is about design not verification what does it concretely mean?

    - by sigo
    I've been wondering about this. What do we exactly mean by design and verification. Should I just apply tdd to make sure my code is SOLID and not check is correct external behaviour ? Should I use Bdd for the correct behaviour part ? Where I get confused also is regarding TDD code katas, to me they looked like more about verification than design... shouldn't they be called bdd katas instead of tdd katas? I reckon that for example uncle bob bowling kata leads in the end to a simple and nice internal design but I felt that most of the process was more around vérification than design. Design seemed to be a side effect of testing incrementally the external behaviour. I didnt feel so much that we were focusing most of our efforts on design but more on vérification. While normally we are told the contrary, that in TDD, verification is a side effect, design is the main purpose. So my question is what should i focus exactly on when i do tdd: SOLID, external Api usability, what else...? And how can I do that without being focused on verification ? What do you guys focus your energy on when you are practicing TDD ?

    Read the article

  • What technical details should a programmer of a web application consider before making the site public?

    - by Joel Coehoorn
    What things should a programmer implementing the technical details of a web application consider before making the site public? If Jeff Atwood can forget about HttpOnly cookies, sitemaps, and cross-site request forgeries all in the same site, what important thing could I be forgetting as well? I'm thinking about this from a web developer's perspective, such that someone else is creating the actual design and content for the site. So while usability and content may be more important than the platform, you the programmer have little say in that. What you do need to worry about is that your implementation of the platform is stable, performs well, is secure, and meets any other business goals (like not cost too much, take too long to build, and rank as well with Google as the content supports). Think of this from the perspective of a developer who's done some work for intranet-type applications in a fairly trusted environment, and is about to have his first shot and putting out a potentially popular site for the entire big bad world wide web. Also, I'm looking for something more specific than just a vague "web standards" response. I mean, HTML, JavaScript, and CSS over HTTP are pretty much a given, especially when I've already specified that you're a professional web developer. So going beyond that, Which standards? In what circumstances, and why? Provide a link to the standard's specification.

    Read the article

  • When is it ever ok to write your own development tools? (editor into IDE)

    - by mario
    So I'm foremost using a text editor for coding. It's a very bare bones editor; provides mostly just syntax highlighting. But on rare occasions I also need to debug something. And that's when I have to resort to an IDE (mostly Netbeans, but got fiddly Eclipse/Aptana working as second fallback). For general use however IDEs feel not workable to me. It's a visual thing, being used to console UIs etc. And switching back and forth between a text editor and an IDE is slightly cumbersome too. That's why I'm considering extending the editor, not really into a full-fledged IDE - but at the very least integrate a debug feature. Since I'm working on PHP, it seems not that much effort. The DBGp allows to externalize a debug handler from the editor, so it's just minor integration work and figuring out how to shoehorn a breakpoint feature into the editor (joe btw). And while I've also got time to do that, I'm wondering if this is really worthwhile. In this case it's not a needed development tool. It's just for convenience. And the cause for doing it is basically just not liking the existing solution. While over time I might extend and adapt this debugger thing, it initially will be as circumstantial as Eclipse. It inevitably starts out as poor development tool. Furthermore there is likely not much reuse. (Okay, this is not an important point. Most such software exists sans much of a use case. And also obviously, similar extensions already exist for emacs and vim, so it cannot be completely pointless.) But what's a general guideline on attempting to conoct custom development tools, particularily if they are not really needed but satisfy personal preferences? (Usability enhancement not certain.)

    Read the article

  • In which fields does quality of the software product matter as much as the completion time?

    - by Nav
    Someone told me that if the software product meets clients expectations, it is good quality. But I've worked with Interaction Designers (the same kind of people who made Gmail's interface and usability so cool!), and I've loved working with them because even though they came up with hundreds of changes in requirements, and emphasised on many many subtle details, when the software was complete, I could look at the product and say WOW! The current place I work, the only thing that matters is completing the project on time. As long as it works and as long as the client says it's ok, nobody bothers to improve it. I'm not talking about gold-plating, but I believe that for a programmer to enjoy his (well, maybe her too ;) ) job, they should be able to proudly say that "Hey, I made that software" and that comes only when the product is of good quality. Apart from your opinions on this, I'd also like to know which fields (Eg. Aerospace, Finance etc.) could I find companies (or you could mention the company name) where the quality of a product is as important as completing the project on time?

    Read the article

  • "TDD is about design, not verification"; concretely, what does that mean?

    - by sigo
    I've been wondering about this. What do we exactly mean by design and verification. Should I just apply TDD to make sure my code is SOLID and not check if it's external behaviour is correct? Should I use BDD for verifying the behaviour is correct? Where I get confused also is regarding TDD code Katas, to me they looked like more about verification than design; shouldn't they be called BDD Katas instead of TDD Katas? I reckon that for example the Uncle Bob bowling Kata leads in the end to a simple and nice internal design but I felt that most of the process was centred more around verification than design. Design seemed to be a side effect of testing the external behaviour incrementally. I didn't feel so much that we were focusing most of our efforts on design but more on verification. While normally we are told the contrary, that in TDD, verification is a side effect, design is the main purpose. So my question is what should I focus on exactly, when I do TDD: SOLID, external API usability, or something else? And how can I do that without being focused on verification? What do you guys focus your energy on when you are practising TDD?

    Read the article

  • During interviews, how do I gauge a company's respect for my position?

    - by Bluu
    I'm a web developer who previously joined a software company not knowing their value and respect went to big data analysis, not their website. Sure, they needed a public-facing website, but I eventually found that the most exciting, valued projects there went to data teams. Realizing this, members of the web team were picked off and switched teams, making it hard for those left behind to keep up the work load, and making us look bad. At times it seemed the company culture sneered at us, wondering, "What does that team even do here?" A friend of mine had the opposite problem at another software company. All he wanted to do was crunch big numbers. However he complained that the rest of the company wouldn't shut up about developing the usability of their website. Meanwhile his analytics team languished. I've also heard of salespeople getting love at a company, while engineering as a whole is undervalued, or vice versa. As for my story, if I could have known the company was like that, I might have avoided the job in the first place. So, before I join a new company, how do I gauge its actual respect for my programming role? For its other roles? I want to avoid companies that aren't serious about my particular focus in programming, or, perhaps bigger picture, companies that don't value everybody who works there. (Note I think gauging the company's attitude toward the basic needs of its programmers is covered by these related questions.)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >