Few days ago, Apple has announced its new product called the iPad. Almost immediately after its announcement i’ve seen a lot of discussions about what the iPad cannot do in stead of what it can. My first assumption was that people want to do everything with one device.
Most people prefer a Swiss Army knife in stead of a machete.
Knowing Apple I knew that they have deliberately put some limits on the iPad and after seeing the speech of Barry Schwartz called The Paradox of Choice on TED I understood why.
During that speech Barry had mentioned something about the value. For what I’ve understood: people can determine value if they have something to compare.
Theese days I see testing as an activity for determining the value of a subject (object?).
Does this mean that we need something for comparison so that we can test properly?
Do we need specs?
Do we need other subject (systems) to compare to?
What do we need for comparison in order to determine the value of the tested subject(object)?
Does this mean that values attracts value?
If a existing system is lousy and a new implemented system is lousy as wel, it wil probably be accepted without serious comments.
Jump to the conclusion:
If a quality (value) is not an issue, whatever you do will be good.
(can’t remember who said that before but I know that mr G.M. Weinberg has mentioned it somwhere in his “Software Quality Management” series.)