Tester's Musings

With all due respect, my take on the matter is:  a.  hypothetically,   if a teamA{devs+testers+designers} >> work together == resulting in a product{Quality = 0.95 good}  b. if same teamA{devs+designers} minus the {Testers} >> work together == resulting in a product{Q = 0.65 good} c. then it means the product{Q} suffers a {0.30 good} reduction without the {Testers}  d. so, mathematically, the Testers seem to contribute to the Product{Q} an exact value of "N"  assuming the Devs work on the findings of Testers e. if Devs don't work on the Testers' findings, then the testers still would've contributed their share to the product being built , but the negative impact of the Devs' under-contribution will adversely affect the overall Product{Q} -- making {Q} fall below agreed values.  f. The relationship of contributions from actors {designers,devs,testers} is apparently non-linear --otherwise things would've been so obvious, this wouldn't be...

Clip intended for educational purposes only. (no copyright infringement intended)

QA/Tester's personal log: 2025.254 Time flies, it is Thursday, and the week has just zipped by. One may wonder what a Tester's day looks like. Well, for me, everyday is like 'thesis day' --  (a) you volunteer to take up a project (i.e. subject_under_test: could be a super_system, sytem, sub_sytem);   (b) pick your way into it ('pick' verb, like using a pick-axe); learning everything you can about the subject_under_test (i.e. explore it), and  (c) compile a test_report of your evaluation of the subject_under_test ; Note that (c) is not just a list of ...  what it 'can do'  and 'not do',  it also specifies under which scenarios it behaves as such,  and what inputs triggered which behavior.  It also requires you to provide proof of your claims: this comes in the form of vids, pics, urls, files, software builds -- virtually anything that could be an artefact (yep, archeologists don't have a monopoly on artifacts) showing proof that supp...