Question on waterfall methods for SW Development

[Rusty Williamson]

Thanks for all of your feedback!  I personally don't believe the waterfall
method is good for much of anything.  The reason I posted this question was
that I'm currently studying RUP and helping to implement the process within
my company.  Several analysts, very good at what they do and good with
domain knowledge (and influential within the company) believe that the
'waterfall' method is best for what we do unless it's a new area.  Before
refuting that I wanted to make sure that I was not being blinded by my own
'passionate beliefs' and so this was a sanity check to see if they in fact
had some point that I was missing.

I believe that an iterative and incremental development process:
1. Manages evolving requirements
2. Manages risk
3. Better develops a proper architecture

My crusade involves not only the RUP, but also OOP, standards, truth,
justice and the American way.  Needless to say it keeps me busy.  :-)

Thanks!
Rusty
------------------------------------------------------------
Rusty Williamson
System Architect
GERS Retail Systems
http://www.gers.com/
The Object Workshop
http://home.san.rr.com/williamson/
Home Page
http://www.znet.com/~rusty/
------------------------------------------------------------

"Rusty Williamson" <rwilliamson at unno.gers.com> wrote in message
news:dxVl5.120$MJ.1606 at typhoon.san.rr.com...
> Hi!
>
> Under what circumstances would a 'waterfall' methodology be better or
> preferable to an 'iterative' methodology?  Any information on this would
be
> greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks!
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Rusty Williamson
> System Architect
> GERS Retail Systems
> http://www.gers.com/
> The Object Workshop
> http://home.san.rr.com/williamson/
> Home Page
> http://www.znet.com/~rusty/
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>