Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I don't know about this author's intention, but in general with design thinking frameworks, the idea is not that each step must be followed rigidly in order and never re-visited. It's more about calling attention to the importance of each part of the framework. Once you know all the inputs needed for creating a great product, you can seamlessly move back and forth among the phases, iterating until you're arrived at the solution.



I agree. In waterfall, you close the 'design door' behind you when you go into implementation. There is nothing wrong with taking a phased approach as long as you keep that door open for the inevitable changes you discover while implementing.

In fact, that's the way it should be. There is no human endeavor that does not benefit from an understanding of how something should be done, before it is attempted. I'm not sure why some seem to feel that software engineering is somehow special in this regard. I can't count the number of times we have had people shout down attempts at serious engineering design, often by using the term "waterfall" in a derogatory manner.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: