Re: Bigger isn't always better

Nathaniel L. Walker wrote:

Well the Visual Studio team is probably about as big as Borland itself <g>
and large teams are where processes like RUP/CMMI/etc. really shine.
It's why they exist. It's why companies like IBM, Microsoft, et. al. can

The problem the articles pointed to was that the process employed by MS didn't exactly "shine", now did it? Does that mean MS employed an inadequate process, that MS has hired under qualified staff, or is it because any organization inevitably becomes bureaucratic when it grows beyond a certain size (when it no longer becomes feasible for anyone in the process to share information and solve issues directly with anyone else in the process)?


There just isn't any amount of mismanagement that can really overshadow the
fact that they released unfinished, buggy software. Borland really does umm...
"fall short" in the management department, but it is no excuse for what Delphi
developers have had to endure in the past three releases. Oh well, at least
they worked harder to get this one in its now usable state.

The release dates and at least some parts of the feature sets were AFAIK decided by Borland upper management. For instance, I don't think the IDE team had any say in the final decision to include Together, but that is just my guess.


--
Henrick Hellström
www.streamsec.com
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Genuine (905474 update)
    ... but the smart ones tell Microsoft to stick WGA where the sun ... doesn't shine. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsupdate)
  • Re: Security of whois database
    ... If I was microsoft I'd find out who was using my registered trade name ... does not shine, ... Jim Watt ...
    (alt.computer.security)