Re: Another book

From: Tayssir John Gabbour (tayss_temp2_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 04/08/04 

Date: 7 Apr 2004 20:31:11 -0700

Cameron MacKinnon <cmackin+nn@clearspot.net> wrote in message news:<H4udnWFFd8e8w-ndRVn_iw@golden.net>...
> Your post reminds me of the Usenet political spam encouraging people to
> hang up the telephone if they hear a heavily accented voice and a poor
> connection, on the theory that it's an offshore call center. I'd bet
> that, if a study were done, a heavier accent and a worse connection
> would indicate the opposite.

You are feeling emotion because you think I believe something. You
analogize my post to spam, and the subtext of your message is that I
wish to do terrible dishonest xenophobic things. From my perspective,
I'm just trying to imagine what rational people might do.

Look at the post you replied to; did I say I desired this hypothetical
future? My desires are irrelevant.

But maybe internet forums are lossy channels of communication too, and
I'll save the political-charged discussion for real life people. I'll
just defend my points and be done with it.

Cameron MacKinnon <cmackin+nn@clearspot.net> wrote in message news:<H4udnWFFd8e8w-ndRVn_iw@golden.net>...
> Tayssir John Gabbour wrote:
> > If onshore programmers agitate for legislation against buggy/insecure
> > programs, I would think offshorers would be penalized
> > disproportionately. Because every need for tighter communication
> > attacks their main weakness -- worse communication channels. It
> > should noticeably affect their cost advantage.
>
> ??
>
> First, you're referring to two VERY different kinds of bugs: Doesn't do
> what customer wants, versus can be tricked into doing things customer
> didn't ask for and (ignorant) programmer didn't forsee.
>
> Assuming that quality, verified software takes more labour to write and
> document than the other kind, I'd say that the vendor with the labour
> cost advantage wins even more. If you think Indian programmers are
> inexpensive, their technical writers are likely paid even less. "Get a
> verified, documented, ISO-9000 certified system for the same low price!"

- Is the bottleneck communication or labor costs?

- When I say "legislation against buggy/insecure programs," I mean
software producers may be liable for damages. Adherence to a process
does not mitigate personal negligence. In fact, Big Process may make
it more difficult for offshorers to deliver real features, which is a
trap.

- The main argument I hear is that purchasers are buying on pure cost,
not value. In many markets, people eventually learn to buy value.

> > Increased sensitivity to software quality would be a good thing for
> > onshorers to cultivate in their markets. This assumes offshorers are
> > generally lower quality due to communication issues.
>
> You phrase it well, but it all sounds suspiciously like telling the
> customer what he wants. Verification processes are known. Most customers
> forgo the cost. I don't think educating them will change their minds.

[Yes, my post is completely about being heavy-handed. I'm just
entertaining what I would do if I were a) manipulative and b) cared.
Personally I am not convinced a problem exists.]

What is education? Branding, and all the other tools of advertising
agencies. Customers can come to appreciate quality, even if some
won't pay a premium for it. There is already a backlash against
certain insecure Microsoft products.

Quantcast