You want to go to mars You spend 3 months designing a rocket You spend 6 months building a rocket You spend a month testing the rocket and notice there is a critical desing flaw.

You start over again with a new design and work on it for 2 months You spend another 6 months building it You spend 2 months testing

Rocket works fine now, but multiple other companies already have been to Mars, so no need to even go anymore.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is the perfect waterfall analogy.

[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

This is the way

[–] tyler@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

pretty sure they're saying waterfall for building a rocket because that's literally how NASA builds a rocket, including the software. It's terrible for building anything other than a rocket though, because the stakes aren't high for most other projects, at least not in the way that a critical mistake will be incredibly bad.

[–] ToxicWaste@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i take you have never heard of the V-model. basically you climb the waterfall back up to verify everything. most things that fly within the atmosphere are done that way. pretty sure NASA would do the same.

[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You can assume people here know what waterfall and the V model are.