Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 9:08 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 1:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 12:11 pm
Posts: 94
Location: A cupboard with a keyboard
This one's for Andy. I was going to discuss this at Sandown with you, but our company decided not to make an appearance on this occasion.

I have worked on several large software projects, and for each one a different software development methodology has been used on each.

Basically, they fall into two camps, "Get it right first time" and "Prototyping".

"Get it right first time" essentially follows the approach of large engineering projects where the system providers have meetings with the end users before a single line of code is even contemplated, let alone written. Specification documents are written, which can be huge and complex, and they effectively become a contractual basis of what the software is going to do and how it's going to do it. Everything is written and tested before delivery, so the end user has to wait for a long time, possibly years. I worked on one such project where it cost £millions and took 8 years from conception to delivery, and at the end of it all it wasn't quite what the users wanted, and cost more £millions in PDS (Post Development Support).

"Prototyping" aims to get initial delivery as fast as possible to end users. The initial result may be nothing like what the users want, and there will almost certainly be lots of bugs. But the power is there for the users to play with the system and get a better idea on what they want, thus further development is directed towards theie needs. Effectively, PDS starts very early and runs through a far greater proportion of the product lifecycle.

There is the argument that building software is cheap (running compilers etc) as opposed to building engineering projects, which is why a lot of planning has to go into the engineering projects; making a mistake is very costly.

There is also the consumer-goods legacy, with respect to VHS/Beta/Video2000 and IBM PC/Apple Mac. Basically, the better engineered products failed, because they didn't get to the market quickly enough.

You also have to consider market sizes; there is mass-production, medium-scale production and single-user delivery. With mass production, any product development costs are absorbed by sales. With the other market sizes, this is not possible. With the single-user case, every change has to be paid for by the user, and only that user benefits.

With medium-scale production, if one user wants changes done, and he pays for those changes alone, he's at a disadvantage because all of the other users benefit from those changes. If each user has his own version of the product, it effectively becomes multiple single-user, and it would be a configuration nightmare for the supplier. The users would inevitably be worse off, since the supplier could then charge every user the same amount for a single feature, even though he only has to develop it once. It's rather "right-wing". Therefore, a supplier is inclined to charge support to pay for the continued development, since it benefits all customers. It's effectively a "left-wing" ideology, where all of the money goes into a melting pot to benefit all. There are losers in this game as well; those who don't want any development, but they are a minority, and don't have to pay for support.

Just remember that when you buy a mobile 'phone you are paying for a lot of features that you certainly didn't want and would probably never use. However, it would be impractical to have it any other way; the only choice you have is which supplier to go for.

Jase

_________________
Next time you wave, use all your fingers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 1:56 pm 
so Jason which catorgory does your products fall into.
expensive and good or cheap and nasty. :D :D :D :D

and what does the rest fall into?

in fact is there any expensive and good out their?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 2:01 pm 
jason cole wrote:
This one's for Andy. I was going to discuss this at Sandown with you, but our company decided not to make an appearance on this occasion.

I have worked on several large software projects, and for each one a different software development methodology has been used on each.

Basically, they fall into two camps, "Get it right first time" and "Prototyping".

"Get it right first time" essentially follows the approach of large engineering projects where the system providers have meetings with the end users before a single line of code is even contemplated, let alone written. Specification documents are written, which can be huge and complex, and they effectively become a contractual basis of what the software is going to do and how it's going to do it. Everything is written and tested before delivery, so the end user has to wait for a long time, possibly years. I worked on one such project where it cost £millions and took 8 years from conception to delivery, and at the end of it all it wasn't quite what the users wanted, and cost more £millions in PDS (Post Development Support).

"Prototyping" aims to get initial delivery as fast as possible to end users. The initial result may be nothing like what the users want, and there will almost certainly be lots of bugs. But the power is there for the users to play with the system and get a better idea on what they want, thus further development is directed towards theie needs. Effectively, PDS starts very early and runs through a far greater proportion of the product lifecycle.

There is the argument that building software is cheap (running compilers etc) as opposed to building engineering projects, which is why a lot of planning has to go into the engineering projects; making a mistake is very costly.

There is also the consumer-goods legacy, with respect to VHS/Beta/Video2000 and IBM PC/Apple Mac. Basically, the better engineered products failed, because they didn't get to the market quickly enough.

You also have to consider market sizes; there is mass-production, medium-scale production and single-user delivery. With mass production, any product development costs are absorbed by sales. With the other market sizes, this is not possible. With the single-user case, every change has to be paid for by the user, and only that user benefits.

With medium-scale production, if one user wants changes done, and he pays for those changes alone, he's at a disadvantage because all of the other users benefit from those changes. If each user has his own version of the product, it effectively becomes multiple single-user, and it would be a configuration nightmare for the supplier. The users would inevitably be worse off, since the supplier could then charge every user the same amount for a single feature, even though he only has to develop it once. It's rather "right-wing". Therefore, a supplier is inclined to charge support to pay for the continued development, since it benefits all customers. It's effectively a "left-wing" ideology, where all of the money goes into a melting pot to benefit all. There are losers in this game as well; those who don't want any development, but they are a minority, and don't have to pay for support.

Just remember that when you buy a mobile 'phone you are paying for a lot of features that you certainly didn't want and would probably never use. However, it would be impractical to have it any other way; the only choice you have is which supplier to go for.

Jase


I thought as much.

Claude :evil:


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:13 pm 
Hi,

We're interested in getting a data system. We like diplomat but are a bit concerned by the fact that part of their company has gone bust.

Can anyone clarify what happened here?
are they still trading?
did customers lose out when the other company went bust?
How can a company go bust and still be selling the same stuff under a slightly different name?

As I say we like the system but are a bit worried they wont be here in 6 months time.

Has anybody bought a diplomat system with full data since the old company went under?

Thanks,

David.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 8:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 12:04 am
Posts: 725
Location: Essex, England
SW1 wrote:
so Jason which catorgory does your products fall into.
expensive and good or cheap and nasty. :D :D :D :D

and what does the rest fall into?

in fact is there any expensive and good out their?


Expensive and good = Auriga

But Auriga is soooooo old hat. DOS screens and all that. A booking screen that covers an wide screen VDU and so on.

On the other hand, DataMaster is reaaaaallly good to look at. But....

_________________
There is Significant Unmet Demand for my Opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 8:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 12:04 am
Posts: 725
Location: Essex, England
Diplomat aint gonna go away. The product is that sort of quality that it will just be picked up again, whatever bashes it gets.

In fact, here's a good scenario (Jason and Stewart will cringe) :

You buy Diplomat...

The firm goes bust.....

You get to keep Diplomat......

You get not to pay any more support costs !!!!!!!!!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :?

_________________
There is Significant Unmet Demand for my Opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 8:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 12:11 pm
Posts: 94
Location: A cupboard with a keyboard
Not quite, Andy. You're asked to change the standing order :)

The change in company name was down to political and financial matters that I don't get involved in. I am aware it makes us look like a dodgy builders merchant. The only major impact on customers has been to change a standing order. That's it.


More to the point, Andy, does the original post give you a better feel for why the software companies charge an ongoing fee, and do you feel better equipped to answer the people you work with/for?

_________________
Next time you wave, use all your fingers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 53921
Location: 1066 Country
Jason I'm just so grateful we don't have to go over all the stuff that took up most of TTF2. :D :D

Anyway what is diplomat, good and expensive or cheap and nasty?

And Andy you are spot on, the Auriga display is rubbish (and that's me being very polite).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:35 pm 
Quote:
You buy Diplomat...

The firm goes bust.....

You get to keep Diplomat......

You get not to pay any more support costs !!!!!!


Oh and what happens when it crashes on a friday night???!!![/quote]


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2003 12:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 12:11 pm
Posts: 94
Location: A cupboard with a keyboard
We're the bit in the middle, Sussex Man.

Now can we please keep to the point raised by the original post? I reiterate:

Quote:
More to the point, Andy, does the original post give you a better feel for why the software companies charge an ongoing fee, and do you feel better equipped to answer the people you work with/for?

_________________
Next time you wave, use all your fingers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2003 1:27 am 
Andy wrote:
Diplomat aint gonna go away. The product is that sort of quality that it will just be picked up again, whatever bashes it gets.

In fact, here's a good scenario (Jason and Stewart will cringe) :

You buy Diplomat...

The firm goes bust.....

You get to keep Diplomat......

You get not to pay any more support costs !!!!!!!!!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :?


let me let you down gently, when they were directors at windowview which owns the midas code they insisted that it had an expiry date.

buy diplomat and when it goes bust (sean ads lately? not at sandown?)
the code will run out and you will be in deep [edited by admin].

Wharfie


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2003 1:30 am 
jason cole wrote:
Not quite, Andy. You're asked to change the standing order :)

The change in company name was down to political and financial matters that I don't get involved in. I am aware it makes us look like a dodgy builders merchant. The only major impact on customers has been to change a standing order. That's it.


More to the point, Andy, does the original post give you a better feel for why the software companies charge an ongoing fee, and do you feel better equipped to answer the people you work with/for?


isnt that theft jason? doesnt that belong to the creditors?
shady very shady.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2003 2:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 12:11 pm
Posts: 94
Location: A cupboard with a keyboard
We're advertising in PHM, and as I said above a decision was made not to attend Sandown.

We removed the expiry date from the software due to getting our fingers burnt recently, so that argument doesn't hold either I'm afraid. There were reasons for using an expiry date that was agreed by all Windowview directors.

As regards the last post, I cannot possibly comment on financial matters, other than the fact that no customers were adversely affected.


PS : If I'm going to get the usual Moore-arse-licking-anti-diplomat-oh-you're-gonna-end-up-knee-deep-in-shit flame whenever I try to offer impartial advice then I'll follow Stewart's approach and just not bother with you guys.


Now, I reiterate:
Quote:
More to the point, Andy, does the original post give you a better feel for why the software companies charge an ongoing fee, and do you feel better equipped to answer the people you work with/for?

_________________
Next time you wave, use all your fingers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:13 am 
well thats not very nice is it Jason?

a man that went out and got you orders paid his cash up front and diplomat
didnt deliver?

and bankrupcy took place so you didnt have to pay him back?

a bit naughty. and did Stewart realy say that then? did he have a nice holiday? your adverts have shrunk a bit then? got to pay up front?

Sam


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:21 am 
jason cole wrote:
We're advertising in PHM, and as I said above a decision was made not to attend Sandown.

We removed the expiry date from the software due to getting our fingers burnt recently, so that argument doesn't hold either I'm afraid. There were reasons for using an expiry date that was agreed by all Windowview directors.

As regards the last post, I cannot possibly comment on financial matters, other than the fact that no customers were adversely affected.


PS : If I'm going to get the usual Moore-arse-licking-anti-diplomat-oh-you're-gonna-end-up-knee-deep-in-shit flame whenever I try to offer impartial advice then I'll follow Stewart's approach and just not bother with you guys.


Now, I reiterate:
Quote:
More to the point, Andy, does the original post give you a better feel for why the software companies charge an ongoing fee, and do you feel better equipped to answer the people you work with/for?



Jason hed be a loonie to get involved.............unless hes going to teach little Luke, to write on paper instead of car seats!

if there is a problem youd walk away like cambridge and york

Sam


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group