Fictional scenario: Trek–Lance Armstrong’s bicycle sponsor–is behind schedule and over-budget on creating a new cycle. They need to find a way to get their product out the door, find it now, and find it cheap. Now, imagine that they threw my grandmother on their bike, had her drive it around the block, and declared it fully tested and ready for mass-production. Would you be satisfied? If it found 300 grandmothers and had them drive around the block twice, would that satisfy you? How about if they used 300 average Joes? Would that satisfy Lance Armstrong? Would he have full confidence in his ride for twenty-one days and over 3,500 km in the tour? I doubt it. That bike wouldn’t even make it out of the warehouse, let alone to the starting line. That bike would not earn respect until it was rigorously tested in a scenario that at least simulates its intended use. So why do so many fail to put their web applications through the same trials?
Money? It will cost more money to fix it after launch than it will to test it during development, identify the issues early, and get them fixed before the product goes out the door.
Time? Well, time is money, so see above.
Experience? There are a lot of good, quality testers out there. If my mechanic doesn’t properly fix my car, I’ll take my car to a different mechanic.
I’m curious about the thoughts of everyone out there.
The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent
my employer's view in any way.