Fw: Re: Desc. for "functionally incomplete" ?

Subject: Fw: Re: Desc. for "functionally incomplete" ?
From: Peter Collins <peter -dot- collins -at- BIGFOOT -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 12:00:47 +1000

I applaud the idea of reliable, phased introduction of features. How
V1.0 is a fully-tested commercial system that performs all these
Planned enhancements, the first due for release in May 1999, will
progressively implement the following:
Of course, you may prefer not to number the lines, to wrap the
features rather than listing them down, and perhaps you would not want
to publish the next release date. Why not? Because
(a) if you miss it you have egg on your face
(b) if it is too far out it conveys an impression that it may never
(c) if it is too close it evokes a "don't buy yet" response.
That's my penn'orth.
Peter Collins, VIVID Management Pty Ltd,
26 Bradleys Head Road, MOSMAN 2088, Australia
+61 2 9968 3308, fax +61 2 9968 3026, mobile +61 (0)18 419 571
Management Consultants and Technical Writers
email: peter -dot- collins -at- bigfoot -dot- com ICQ#: 10981283
web pages: http://www.angelfire.com/pe/pcollins/

-----Original Message-----
From: Rowena Hart [SMTP:rhart -at- INTRINSYC -dot- COM]
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 1998 7:46 AM
Subject: Desc. for "functionally incomplete" ?

Hi folks,

A question from one of our programmers:

How would you describe software that is in its v1.0 release and bug-
free, but "functionally incomplete"? As an example --

* The product will eventually support 40 features.

* The current release (v1.0) supports 25 of these features, bug-free.

* These initial 25 features provide basic functionality -- the product
performs the tasks that are required and nothing more.

* With each new release the product will evolve beyond basic
functionality, until it supports all 40 features.

Is there a term, possibly like "beta," that indicates that a product
not buggy, it just doesn't support all possible features?


rhart -at- intrinsyc -dot- com

Rowena Hart
Technical Writer
Intrinsyc Software, Inc.
Vancouver, B.C. Canada

From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=

Previous by Author: Job Posting: Int/Sr Technical Writer, Markham (N. Toronto), Ontario
Next by Author: Incorrectly read instructions - by us humans
Previous by Thread: Re: Desc. for "functionally incomplete" ?
Next by Thread: Re: Desc. for "functionally incomplete" ?

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads