

Ask HN: How to explain to a non-tech that bug fixing gets charged? - alcuadrado

Today I was talking with a photographer and a designer, and one of them commented about an acquaintance having made a mistake at work and correcting it with her own money, what I replied that I charge my clients for fixing my own errors (of course there are exceptions). They couldn't believe it, and I failed to convince them that its normal, and makes sense. How would you explain it?
======
rmATinnovafy
Bugs are not mistakes. They are flaws. Two different things.

If you were fixing cars, then you could call a mistake if you put the wrong
oil in the engine. That you would need to cover.

But if you changed the oil, and the oil turned out to be "bad" ( for a lack of
a better term ), then the oil had bugs in it. It was flawed.

------
caw
I think the commonality is that all 3 professions would get paid for updates
the clients requested, but mistakes made by the professional would have to get
covered.

Updates: Additional photography sittings, design modifications, bug fixes.

Mistakes: Lost data, work that is later found to not meet the spec.

But in the end, it all comes down to how you want to run your business. If you
charge the customer for whatever extra you're doing, what's going to be the
result of this? Are you going to chase them off? Get a bad recommendation? Is
there no harm at all?

Depending on that outcome and what you want, you can probably find the answer
as to whether you should cover it or not.

------
jnorthrop
Simple: No piece of software is perfect and bugs should be expected. You
charge for work at an hourly rate. A bug fix requires additional hours of
work. Therefore you charge for fixing bugs.

~~~
alcuadrado
That's what I said, but try it yourself and you will discover that it makes no
sense for most other people

~~~
sojourner
Actors don't get paid just for performances, or for only the performances in
which they deliver the lines perfectly. They get paid for rehearsals, costume
time, makeup time, etc., and for the performances in which they missed their
cue, came on stage early, left l

Creating software is a creative process, and there is rarely an end point
where the software is completely bug-free, or where there is absolutely no
further improvement which can be made.

Bugs are like flubbed lines. They happen. They _always_ happen. And coders get
paid for fixing them.

If your doctor makes a mistake, does he give you a refund? Or does he charge
both for the mistake and the new fix? Your lawyer?

------
pestaa
To me, software bugs are not inherently visible in a way that a bad photo is.

Unless tests, QA and the like were listed on the requirements list, I believe
most fixes should be charged, too. Of course when tests are required and
written according to the contract, and obvious bugs still fall through the
cracks, that is an entirely different matter.

This is a difficult subject imho, because most employers are not willing to
pay for testing and, unfortunately, not for fixing the consequences, either.

