What an idiot! -‘testing departments are for losers’

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:


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.

0 thoughts on “What an idiot! -‘testing departments are for losers’”

  1. The article wasn't bad, while are there some points that I think are a bit off, over all the theme of his article is a good one. (the title is a bit sensationalized but that’s how you gain attention)

    Quality Assurance isn't a tester’s function and developers do have a direct impact on the quality of a product. The better a programmer does the lower the chance something will make it to the field, and the harder the task for a tester.

    Testing helps discover problems that a developer hasn't found, we are information providers. But if none of the information we provide gets addressed then the quality doesn’t really change. Also testers don't have the authority to coach developers who might be struggling at writing high quality code or change the processes intended to guide decisions about quality. At best a tester are Quality Assistance not Assurance.

    So who assures quality if it’s not testers? Typically it’s management. They have the authority to make changes that directly impact quality. They also typically decide when and if a product should ship and are ultimately responsible for the outcome of shipping.

    Overall the theme of the article is a good one; developers have a heavy hand in the quality of software and should not rely on testers to find everything…because they can’t.

  2. Ben,

    I agree on the article theme, but the overall article was poorly written. The views were unstructured and confusing. Obviously, the author was trying to create smoke by sensationalizing the title so that readers don't pay attention to contradictions.

    My concern & issue with this article was poor understanding of author about testing. I have no issues in accepting the fact that quality is just not tester's job. I did say in my response to him that we testers only show mirror.

    You are right, at best a tester is quality assistance not assurance. For some reason, it appears that the author of that article does not get it. I agree his intentions are to say that the better developers do, the lesser chances of finding defects; but somehow he did not know how to say that. He seems to be coming from a blaming culture.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *