Good vs Bad Software

[Bill Egge]

This topic is not about architecture, but about spotting bad software before development is even started.  I would like to see an objective discussion on the topic.

Good Software:
I have noticed some aspects of good software vs bad software.

 
• Makes an existing Job easier
   
• Gets used by people
   
• Is sometimes used beyond its designed purpose
   
• It becomes a "Must Have"
  

Bad Software
Some aspects of bad software I have noticed are:

 
• It does not get used
   
• It is disliked or even hated
  

One question comming to mind is a certain motive and its relationship to Bad software.  I am vagually aware of something like a "Management Motive" and it somehow being related to Bad software.

Comments?

[Kevin Brennan]

I'm not sure what you mean by a "management motive".

At a guess, I assume that you're talking about software that is designed with the intent of restricting how users can perform their work. Applications like this often remove shortcuts that existed in earlier versions of the system or business process and force users to make sure that all the proper steps in the business process are followed all the time, even at times when they're overloaded with other tasks?

[Bill Egge]

No not that.  More like person X is not doing their job so lets make some software to force him to.

For instance, suppose person X is suppose to notify person Y when he finished doing some job, but person X is not doing it - so to "solve" the problem, create some intrusive program that pops up on X's desktop and asks if they are done - and if they answer yes then the program notifies person Y.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

This topic is not about architecture, but about spotting bad software before development is even started.  I would like to see an objective discussion on the topic.

Now here's an interesting and thought provoking topic, Bill...

[size=13][SNIP][/size]

You might also want to discuss spotting bad software at any point in its lifecycle...  And what to do about it.

If you can't see there is a problem with the software, you can't rectify it...

If you don't understand what the problem is with the software, you can't rectify it...

We need to understand software is bad "by design".  If we don't accept responsibility for the outcome of our design, then we can't rectify it.

Good software does the task required in a "natural" way.  As you say, makes it easier.

Bad software gets in the way of getting the job done.

Most software, though (say like EA), is like the Curate's Egg - good in parts...

Just some initial thoughts.

Paolo

[Paolo F Cantoni]

[size=13][SNIP][/size]  

• Is sometimes used beyond its designed purpose

[size=13][SNIP][/size]

Well Bill,
I just got caught be this...
However, before a user can tell what the designed purpose is, the supplier has to elaborate it...

If you say X, then the user is quite correct in assuming that you provide X.  Enough at least to include you in the list of possible solutions, rather than discard you.

As some of you may know, I'm investigating the use of CodeDOM with EA (via my emitted interface).  You saw the results of initial testing.  Well, CodeDOM isn't so neat... It's not complete.  There's sufficient missing to force me to reevaluate my design decisions...

OT: Has anyone else had experience with CodeDOM?  Are there any CodeDOM newsgroups on the net?  I couldn't find any with a quick search.

It may well be that the Microsoft implementation of CodeDOM is suitable for it's designed purpose, but I can't tell what that is...  It's certainly not suitable in its current form for my purposes.

Frustratedly,
Paolo

[thomaskilian]

Good Software:
I have noticed some aspects of good software vs bad software.

• Makes an existing Job easier
    
• Gets used by people
• Is sometimes used beyond its designed purpose
• It becomes a "Must Have"

Sounds like "myriads of flies can't be wrong: eat S H I T". I don't think that Microsoft DOS, Windows 95, etc. was/is good software :P. There's definitely a set of better alternatives ;)

(how prude: what about S H I T? Now I have to B O L D that word.  It's only food for flies!)

[sargasso]

Good software is supportable, i.e. it has a well defined set of requirements, architecture, design and code......... sigh.

Unix view - good software does one thing well.

bruce

[thomaskilian]

Which way to go? Is there any independant quality measure for Good and Bad Software? Or can you go vice versa and divide Software in Good and Bad and find out what each section has in common.

What about "inner" criteria, such as documentation, indentation (sic!), naming convention, maintainability, a.s.o.? I remember having had Good and Bad Vibrartions just by looking at a piece of code. I almost never was deceived by this kind of feeling. Still I think there is better software for almost anything and only (just a feeling ) few software is really Good.

[mikewhit]

Paolo,
On the subject of the curate's egg, I have alway taken it to mean that the egg was actually bad, but the mild-mannered non-confrontational curate was too polite to say so, hence he made what positive comment he could !

On that reading, EA is much better than that.

Mike

PS. I presume the Egge pun was unintentional ?! Or did I underestimate you ...

[thomaskilian]

...the curate's egg...

Thanks for pointing that out  I'd never started reading about that without your post.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

Paolo,
On the subject of the curate's egg, I have alway taken it to mean that the egg was actually bad, but the mild-mannered non-confrontational curate was too polite to say so, hence he made what positive comment he could !

On that reading, EA is much better than that.

Mike

PS. I presume the Egge pun was unintentional ?! Or did I underestimate you ...

A quick google (I'll now have Google on my back for turing the noun into a verb... )  Shows that you are literally correct, but cololoquially:
CURATE’S EGG

Perhaps I should start by explaining curate, since I’m told that this name for a junior ecclesiastical post is not well known outside Britain. A curate is an ordained minister who is an assistant to a vicar or parish priest; he (these days sometimes she) is at the bottom of the priestly pecking order, poorly paid and with no job security.
Let us now turn to the humorous British magazine Punch for 9 November 1895, which featured a cartoon drawn by George du Maurier. This showed a timid curate having breakfast in his bishop’s home. The bishop is saying “I’m afraid you’ve got a bad egg, Mr Jones”, to which the curate replies, in a desperate attempt not to give offence: “Oh, no, my Lord, I assure you that parts of it are excellent!”.
Readers liked this exchange so much that the cartoon led to the catchphrases “parts of it are excellent”, and “good in parts”, which are recorded from the beginning of the twentieth century. The phrase curate’s egg itself means something that is partly good and partly bad and so not wholly satisfactory: “this book is a bit of a curate’s egg”. (Despite one American dictionary, it does not mean “something discreetly declared to be partly good but in fact thoroughly bad”, which would be its literal interpretation.)

I was using it in the colloquial form.

This time the pun was not intended, but probably subconcious...  I really like puns (as you may have noticed)!

Paolo

[thomaskilian]

PS. I presume the Egge pun was unintentional ?! Or did I underestimate you ...

Have you noticed Bill's homepage?