Re: [AM] Article of Interest in CIO Magazine

[email protected] wrote:

> Worse yet, in my nearly thirty years of development experience,
> I have almost never had anyone, other than myself, suggest that
> the anticipated lifetime costs of the system be assessed and
> taken into account prior to the "closing the book" on the
> design of the system.

I was working on a system a while back where I went to the data
centre people and asked what their requirements for running the
system would be.  It turned out they had a long list of
requirements about clustering tools, logging tools, security,
etc, that no one had thought about at all.  I got the data
centre's requirements tagged onto the end of the functional
requirements and asked the vendors how they intended to meet
those requirements.  After all, a system is worse than useless -
i.e. it costs you a lot of money for no payback - if you can't
operate the system.

On another system, we were deciding which parts of the overall
business system could be implemented manually (rather than in
software) in order to meet the deployment deadline.  Software
would reduce the running costs (cut out lots of temporary
labour), but the delay needed to write the software would cost
too much in terms of lost revenue.  Those parts can be added
later after the initial deployment as a cost-reduction
initiative.

Pete, this soapbox ain't big enough for the two of us!

--
Hubert Matthews         http://www.oxyware.com/
Software Consultant     [email protected]

For more information about AM, visit the Agile Modeling Home Page at www.agilemodeling.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrKDA.bWnbtk.Z2NtYS1h
Or send an email to: [email protected]

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------