Posted by MonkeyClub 4 days ago
Unfortunately Mr Schedule and the pietschy.com website disappeared. I made my own recreation using REALbasic / Xojo at the time, but never released it and faded from using it.
Joel Spolsky expanded the idea later with Evidence Based Scheduling:
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2007/10/26/evidence-based-sch...
That takes the estimates from Painless Software Schedules, but runs a Monte Carlo simulation using your estimates & data on actual time taken, to create a confidence distribution curve graph of when you'll be finished.
The most important is that the team needs to actually use the task board (or whatever data source you use to get your inputs) to track their work actively. It cannot be an afterthought that gets looked at every now and then, it actually needs to be something the team uses.
My current team kind of doesn't like task boards because people tend to work in small groups on projects where they can keep that stuff in their own heads. This requires some more communication but that happens naturally anyway. They are still productive, but this kind of forecasting doesn't work then.
It took me a few hours to do and as Joel says in the article, it was not a fun thing to do (jumping right into code was more fun) but I stuck with it and did the whole thing.
Then I followed that list of tasks and kept track of when tasks started and ended and I was pleasantly surprised when after a few weeks the project was done right on schedule as predicted by the excel sheet. So my experience (data point of 1) was that it works if you do it exactly how he says to do it in the blog post.
I did it only that one time so take that for what it is.
That process isn't free. For many features, it's the largest share of the work.
Even for features that stay on the cutting-room floor. Especially for features that stay on the cutting-room floor.
1) write down everything you're going to do
2) write down how long that's going to take
3) add them all up and voila! You have a schedule!
The ways this breaks down in practice would be comical if not for the fact that everybody takes it so seriously. The biggest problem is that step 1 takes longer than the actual software development task all the time, every time. That might not be _so_ bad other than the fact that it's also always completely wrong.This post from spolsky is always amusing to me because it came 6 months after Microsoft was convicted of antitrust violations to crush Netscape. So it's funny that he claims Netscape killed themselves, when the courts actually said that Microsoft killed Netscape. Obviously Netscape made critical bad decisions, but Microsoft's illegal behavior was what actually killed them.
Seems like he managed both.
It was a different age, with different products. I’m sure there are still products built the old ways, but Joel was writing before SaaS and CI/CD and endless roadmaps.
He seems to have other posts on the lifecycle of software and product budding. Maybe it wasn’t mainstream then but some folks were doing meaningful parts of it.
Both products were initially once-off purchases that you had to install and run on your own infrastructure, and with new, major versions packed with new features that you had to buy if you wanted, but could ignore if you didn’t.
The move to a SaaS model came years later for both products.