The problem I have with the standard account of the history of Agile - and that's what this contains - is that it doesn't match my understanding of the history.
I've pointed out before on HN that I've read accounts about software development at Apple, Be, Commodore, Data General, Infocom, Microsoft, VisiCorp and others during the pre-Agile era of the 1970s-1990s.
None of them used waterfall in any meaningful way.
As an example of the disconnect between the Agile story and my understanding of history, the author mentions:
> The typical picture of corporate programming in the 1990s is of the existentially bored twenty-somethings in Douglas Coupland’s novel Microserfs,
Microsoft wasn't structured around waterfall design, and was far from the typical picture of corporate programming of the era.
Here's what Steve McConnell wrote about Microsoft in "Rapid Development (1996) Page 271:
] In addition to providing explicit support for morale, Microsoft gladly trades other factors to keep morale high, sometimes trading theme in ways that would make other companies shudder (Zachary 1994). I've seen then trade methodological purity, programming discipline, control over the product specification, control over the schedule, management visibility -- almost anything to benefit morale.
I've pointed out before on HN that I've read accounts about software development at Apple, Be, Commodore, Data General, Infocom, Microsoft, VisiCorp and others during the pre-Agile era of the 1970s-1990s.
None of them used waterfall in any meaningful way.
As an example of the disconnect between the Agile story and my understanding of history, the author mentions:
> The typical picture of corporate programming in the 1990s is of the existentially bored twenty-somethings in Douglas Coupland’s novel Microserfs,
Microsoft wasn't structured around waterfall design, and was far from the typical picture of corporate programming of the era.
Here's what Steve McConnell wrote about Microsoft in "Rapid Development (1996) Page 271:
] In addition to providing explicit support for morale, Microsoft gladly trades other factors to keep morale high, sometimes trading theme in ways that would make other companies shudder (Zachary 1994). I've seen then trade methodological purity, programming discipline, control over the product specification, control over the schedule, management visibility -- almost anything to benefit morale.