Taking your tree house metaphor, the very first iteration could simply produce a platform in the tree, for example. Then the customer could decide whether next he wanted something to protect him from rain, something that protects him from wind, something that allows him to see inside the house when it’s dark etc.

There’s no doubt that you have a lot of experience in this industry and we certainly welcome your views and your comments, provided they don’t just act as a way for you to bash the author without some constructive criticism like "you may wish to step outside of your narrow view of the world and find out why I take issue with your post", instead perhaps take a more collaborative approach and maybe outline a few of the many things you seem to take issue with. I would think that someone who knew what you knew about human cognition and social psychology would know more about online social collaboration, which is why most technical blogs are about, don’t just leave a bashing remark to make yourself feel better about yourself, someone with your credentials should not spend time with such pety activities, I think that’s why you were received by others in this manner. Perhaps you can learn something more about dealing with people. Your choice. Cheers!

Just to be clear, I am a software engineer not a web app developer or designer. I hate doing user interfaces. I find other things more challenging like C++ communications code that processes medical images so a doctor can in 5 minutes know what treatment to apply by looking at, for the first time ever, 4D images of a stroke patient’s brain with full blood profusion maps. I also find interesting writing C++ code to control robotics in an automated rapid fire non-line of sight cannon, or C code for pacemaker features. I sometimes like to do point of sale systems for fine dine restaurants because I usually get to eat free when I’m doing them. Other times I’ll write C algorithms to quality check MRI images or to calculate the geometry of air traffic data in a precision approach system. In my experience base, the project diversity and the team size variations is more than sufficient to understand agile development.

Now understanding from the cognitive and social psychological side of the problems with corporate software engineering, I understand iterative principles and how to apply them. I didn’t at first because I was focusing on how to spec out better and more comprehensive requirements up front. But I refused to just react and decided to think critically and to explore it. I ignored the agile “evangelists” because I was looking for where my practice could benefit. If indeed found prudent application and benefit.

I recommend gaining an understanding of iterative principles and see where their benefit may apply to your work. If you don’t think iterative principles apply to web development, there are those who would disagree and are accomplished at it. Instead of bashing, go seek them out. Perhaps there is something you can benefit from in whatever you do for a living.

The reason why I ended up at this site is because of a post in one of the agile forums taking issue with this blog. After reading it, I felt inclined to comment in the hope you might be interested in a new level of thinking. If you don’t think I have anything to offer because my website is crap, that’s your choice.

The angle I was coming from wasn’t just that your website was very poorly done both technically and aesthetically, but that you list such skills on your resume and appear to have very poor mastery of them. Thusly, you undermined your own credibility, I merely pointed it out.

I don’t have any firm opinions of Agile over Non-agile methodologies. Your original comment has done little in the way of providing any useful information that would steer me, or other information seekers towards your line of thinking. Simply claiming "I am smarter than you" as a retort to someone who doesn’t agree with your line of thinking doesn’t much model proper Critical Thinking ™ does it?

Dan Wilson

Apparently my comments didn’t bode well in this social scene, but they were on purpose. Mine was a response perhaps over-fitting for the kind of language in the original post – as others have noted in the past, it was my Mr. Hyde. It was also inappropriately projecting my own values. When I hear about someone’s experience and it is more than mine, I tend to listen to them and find out why they took issue with whatever the topic I’m communicating on – in the hope I’ll learn something.

Your comment about undermining my own credibility is based on false premises and fallacies, and is not applicable. If I was touting web app skills and I just finished my website to prove it – and that was the topic, then you have a valid point. Otherwise, it seems to me your point was an ad hominem response from your affect reaction to my post. Regardless, the situation underpinning your premise is not the case and I don’t do web programming (which is ironic given this website). Listing on my resume the use of a script or markup language in a project or an era doesn’t constitute me advertising I’m a web programmer. In fact, this exchange is simply social and has no bearing on the topic at all. But, for the sake of managing perceptions, you do have point that has been noted.

Interesting how you viewed my posts as alluding to being smarter. I never wrote what you quoted or used language close to it. I did explain my background to convey I was sufficiently experienced to know the difference because of the experience. I’m sure there are plenty who read this – including you – who have higher IQs or EQs and who organize their intelligence to do amazing things I cannot. Conveying I am smarter was never my intent or the message.

The original post was an affect diatribe of sorts, likely based on a general attitude against the iterative paradigm. The post was likely then borne of exploring justification of that attitude. However, it provided little reference to specific problems taken with Agile I could address. I was hoping my original post would draw out of Nat those specific issues outside of a metaphor, which could then be explored.

Again, this seems to be more rooted as a social debate, which I don’t know why I’m continuing in. I will say I intended to shake up the thoughts of Mr. Papovich. I will also contend some form of specification always needs to be provided. But specifications by themselves do not promise anything, and are inherently flawed for reasons few software types understand or care about. The foundation of Agile development is outlined in the Agile Manifesto (www.agilemanifesto.org) and should be the basis of instruction for executing an Agile project.

Dan, I’m curious why you capitalize and show a trademark for “Critical Thinking”. Can you explain?

Thanks for stopping by and for leaving the comments. This section has been edited out of my final presentation, which I’ll be delivering in June. I agree that it’s a bit over-generalized and uses poor metaphors. That’s why I put it up here – for comments just like yours!

I’ve read the iterative book you wanted to write and still don’t agree with most of the principles, as do many successful developers and project managers. Iterative works for some, it doesn’t work for others, and others (myself included) take what we like from the Agile manifesto and make our clients happy. And if you attend my presentation, you’ll notice that I don’t knock iterative development in my final version – I only take umbrage with iterative developers who knock everyone else.

I prefer to educate and recommend to developers who are looking for education and recommendations. I’m not trying, nor would I ever try, to influence people like you.