I don't think the concept of quality is anywhere as complicated as you make it out to be.

Let's take your example of claiming that your software is all very 'gloomf'. So I'll ask you a few questions:

If you can't measure gloomf, I'll know you don't have any, or if you do, it's by chance. If you measure gloomf, but you get it wrong, I'll know you are well-intentioned but clueless. If you don't have many gloomf-assurance folks (with at least some power and a level of independence from the development management) or if you don't give them much time to ensure your software is gloomf, then I'll know you are gloomf-challenged. If there is no discernible difference between gloomf failures detected before software is rolled out and gloomf failures detected (presumably by customers) after the software is distributed, then I'll know that you either have crummy developers, lazy gloomf-assurance folks, or very adventuresome customers (or perhaps all three).

There are a lot of things that can't be proven, but we still can hedge our bets. When you apply for a mortgage, the bank tries to cover its investment by assuring itself that you have future earnings potential. You can't prove that you will continue to earn money, but you can show your W-2 statements over the past several years and demonstrate that, if the past is a decent predictor of the future, you will be able to pay your mortgage. In the same way, we can assure ourselves of quality in future use of software by demonstrating that we have exercised due diligence in the software development cycle.

The happy news for software developers is that there is so little quality out there that even a little can give you a substantial competitive advantage. I used to do QA work for a major online retailer and I took a lot of pride in finding bugs in software before it was rolled out, often very hurriedly. If you have ever worked with a competent QA person, you know that they are worth their weight in gold, and you tremble when you turn your software over to them. Some things cannot be strictly 'proven', but you can provide some pretty decent safeguards and assurances that at least you tried to get it right.

Heck, you might even qualify for a mortgage.


No good deed goes unpunished. -- (attributed to) Oscar Wilde

In reply to Re: What is quality? by ptum
in thread What is quality? by jimt

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.