Blog

What an idiot! -‘testing departments are for losers’ (The Pragmatic Testing)

On January 22, 2013, in Syndicated, by Association for Software Testing
0
It wasn’t worth wasting any time, but the sheer BS prompted me to respond. Then, the plan for the evening had changed and I could easily multitask on something unimportant while watching TV, so I decided to respond to a dork on a stupid article. 

You can read the article at the link below. I would strongly suggest not to unless you have suicidal tendencies and consider this article as one of the ways to kill yourself. Below the link is my response to that worthless article:

http://java.dzone.com/articles/testing-departments-are-losers#comment-93129

Dear Mahal,
After reading half of your article I knew that you know nothing about the subject you are talking about. I would still not call it BS because that would be insulting the manure. I did not have to read the complete article because in order to check whether the curry is ready or not, you just have to taste (test) few drops of it! Please read my comments below:
“I understand that this is a very strong statement and I’m definitely not trying to insult anyone; so apologies in advance.”
You do not need to apologize, I am sure you have no idea about testing. The statement is ‘not’ a very strong statement, as we testers have to deal with ignoramuses everyday and we do that with tact, as would be visible in my response to you (hopefully). 
Yes, you are trying to insult your colleagues; and possibly because one of those smart testers has found defects in your code. Right? You can be honest with us, Mahal.
“I’m trying to challenge the belief that testing is mandatory and that there should be one testing resource for every two developers.”
Where did you get that belief from? Do yo have any statistics to support that? I know you don’t. If your belief is based on biases, then you do need to recollect that data and base that on facts, not biases.
“Quality development is about quality assurance and zero defects not about having testing departments.”
This statement actually does not make any sense as there is no such thing as zero defect. 
“Quality Assurance (QA) is about making a positive statement about product quality.  QA is about positive assurance, which is stating,  “We are certain that there are few, if any, defects in this product.” 
I have to repeat it many time and I have no hesitation in doing that. After all that’s my job as a tester. QA and testing are not just about ‘making’ positive or negative statements. Would you accept the ‘positive assurance’ from the QA group if it says, “We are certain that there are few, if any, defects in the product. BTW, those few may all be high severity defects.”
You have no idea of QA too, isn’t it? I know I am wasting my time, but showing the mirror is my job. Now it is up to the OP to either break the mirror or accept the defect. Another choice is killing the messenger. Up to you!.
“Airplanes are a product with quality assured, the manufacturers will stand by their quality and the statistics back them up.  Contrast this with this article or this article which wonders what would happen if Microsoft made airplanes — would you fly in them?”
Aha!! You got my attention here. I love those machines. I ‘test’ the software on them; and I ‘QA’ the hardware changes on some; and I ‘test’ the integration with avionics on them and sometimes I also review (static ‘testing’ like inspection) the manufacturer’s work. There is a lot more I do as a ‘tester’ on the airplanes. But, as I said before, you have no idea what you are talking about and you will have no idea what I am talking about too.

Let me ask you a question. When, where & how did you get the quality assurance statement from an aircraft manufacturer to be assured of the quality of their product? Are you confusing aircraft manufacturers with airlines? And are you seriously referring us to those two articles? One written by a former manager at KPMG and other one by a nobody. Both have no background or understanding of airline industry. It is easy to say anything, right? But is hard to compare a $300 computer with a $300 million airplane. and it is NOT easy to compare both of those with a single life. Do you want me to spend similar effort on testing your notepad application because some nube somewhere could not access notepad on his laptop? Are you seriously serious? Hey Mahal, do you dope dude?
“he reality is that most testing departments simply discover defects and forward them back to the engineering department to fix.  By the time the software product gets released we are basically saying, “We got rid of as many defects as we could find before management forced us to release this product, however, we really have no idea how many other defects are in the code”.  This is not assuring quality; at best you get negative assurance  out of this.”
Nah, the reality is that you have no idea what testing is, how it should be performed and what testers actually do. You need to wake up, learn more about things you talk about even before you think of writing a single word. That’s a different story if you get paid for writing non-sense. I won’t question that then. 
Now it is my turn to apologize. I read your article up to the point mentioned above. The reason being, it wasn’t worth wasting any more time. You know, testing is a cognitive process and a tester has more creative things to do. If you wish to learn more about testing or airplanes, please do not contact me. I am known for losing my patience with a specific species. Please also think twice contacting James Bach because he also belongs to the same category and he is fiercer than I am.
 

Comments are closed.


Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!