Today we welcome nFocus employee, Kyla Rice, with her musings on working from home.
Topics: testing times
Today, I’d like to blog about mobile testing. Like many of you out there, I am a frequent mobile user and I would feel considerably inconvenienced were I to be without it for even just a few hours!
The market is flooded with mobile hand-held devices, and we rely so heavily on them for so many reasons- communication, diary bookings, notes, reminders, security and protection, emergencies, socialising, learning, entertainment, sleep, relaxation and so on.
It would be extremely time consuming to test each function on every make, model and operating system combination. As a result, regression testing can become a blocker to putting new releases live. Many companies limit their testing of new products, fixes, and changes to a defined list of the most popular supported device makes and models. Some companies work with Testing Services Providers to support a robust testing process, often using test automation, with advice on choosing, introduction, implementation, maintenance, monitoring and management of tools that are tailored to suite the organisational needs of budget, timescales and strategic targets.
Today’s blog is about pet computer experience hates, ’Better out than in!’ so, they say. Let's refer to it as my ‘Testing Room 101’ target list.
The reality is these are experienced by people across the board and not just software testers of course! Perhaps the line of work of a software tester makes them more noticeable, or perhaps they subconsciously look for them.
There’s nothing like a good rant to get things off your chest when things are annoying, so here goes! How many of these are on your pet hate list?
Welcome back to the second part in my blog series exploring real world SAFe. This second part picks up from where Part 1 finished so if you haven’t read that yet I’d recommend doing so before reading on.
Today we welcome back our popular guest author, Renée Elizabeth Mineart.
If I were asked to encapsulate what makes humans unique in a single sentence, I’d probably say: “our ability to achieve the impossible.” This trait is often best demonstrated when we are faced with adversity- a planet wide pandemic, for example.
Today we welcome back Jane Kelly, who writes about her experience as a QA Tester.
The role of a QA Tester is to review and analyse new or changed software applications, products, mobile devices, and more, and to look for defects, or issues so that these can be resolved before a software change delivery is released for operational use.
Today we welcome back our guest author Renee Mineart, for the final piece in her series on Redefining Success. If you’ve just come across this series, I would encourage you to start at the beginning, so here are links to the previous posts:
In my last post, Building a Testing Centre of Excellence, I identified the first few steps needed to create a testing centre of excellence. These are:
- Build the business case
- Define and share your vision
- Create the leadership team and
- Define your operating and financial model.
Today we welcome back our popular guest author, Renee Mineart.
In my previous blog on this topic, I introduced a few ideas that might improve your communication with your UAT testers and how to set expectations on what you want them to do.
I’d now like to expand on this and explore the ways you can provide a safe environment for failure in order to promote success. To do this, I’d like to take you back in time to 1990.
What is SAFe?
SAFe is a framework which combines various pieces of different agile methodologies and principles such as Scrum, Kanban, Extreme Programming (XP), Lean and DevOps.
Why use SAFe?
The SAFe model of working is relevant to large organisations with multiple development teams delivering highly complex systems.
Should everyone adopt SAFe?
Adopting SAFe in smaller team structures with few cross-team dependencies would negatively impact the agility of these teams and affect delivery and velocity. The overheads of planning in particular would probably outweigh the benefits of adopting SAFe.