Comments on: Not all testing is software testing

By: Saam

Saam — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:29:40 +0000

I also agree, and I think we have the same problem in “system development”. We tend to talk about HW development, SW development, Test, Configuration Management etc as separate disciplines instead of focusing on the bigger picture. And this gives an imbalance. Its like having a recipe of a dish – by focusing on getting the best version of one ingredient doesnt mean the overall taste of the dish actually improves.

With this I mean that one should only separate and differentiate when needed – not use it as starting point. Meaning that we should talk about testing (if needed to be separated from the bigger picture), then talk about SW testing if we need to differentiate even further.

By: Henrik Emilsson

Henrik Emilsson — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:05:56 +0000

I agree with you Martin.
And especially since software and hardware systems becomes more and more tangible and integrated in our lives.
E.g., System Testing of a cell phone includes both hardware and software testing simultaneously and the test approach should include both.
On the other hand there are techniques that are better suited for software testing and others for hardware testing that of course must be taken into consideration.

I believe, and this is most subjective, that software testing has tried to resemble hardware testing as much as possible such that it tries to treat software testing a deterministic system. This has lead to a lot of bad software testing being performed over the last years. And this is the reason why so many want to treat software testing as a “factory” where testing is reduced to scripted recipes and bad metrics are used to assess quality and control the work.

Perhaps software testing has developed more (or at least been forked more times) than hardware testing and perhaps it is time to bring back some of the most interesting ideas regarding sapient software testing back into hardware testing!? And as Martin says, the testing techniques and approaches could benefit from including the hardware dimensions.

Martin, I am looking forward to reading more from you regarding this subject!

By: Martin Jansson

Martin Jansson — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:40:02 +0000

Naturally you are free to say whatever you want, but when we talk about testing I think it is possibe to consider if talk about just software testing or about testing in general. There is a lot written about software testing, how much is written about other kinds of testing? Are there a growing group who identify themselves as production test equipment tester or do the tag along on the software testers ride? I do not identify myself as a software tester. I know a lot about the general software environment, but I dare say that noone is familiar with a general system environment.

By: Rikard Edgren

Rikard Edgren — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:15:36 +0000

I think it’s OK to say software testing for things that apply elsewhere as well.
Probably you have used software testing as a base when developing the course, or what you are talking about, meaning it is most appropriate for just software testing.
Rather, I think it is important to know that you can learn a lot from areas that aren’t exactly the same as yours.
It’s not the name that sets the limit, it is the thinking of non-software testers and managers that sets the limit.

Regarding testing of other things than software, I think it would be very fruitful to use software testers (with a lot of critical and creative thinking) when designing laws in the society; build scenarios and look at the outcome; is this what we want to accomplish; are the negative side-effect acceptable?