Quote:
Originally Posted by Duggan
Just chiming in as someone who understands that it's hard to provide deadlines and that things come up.
|
Sure, that's a reasonable statement as an individual and for the most part is a fair statement as a company. Though I will say if it becomes a constant form of operation, then it is either poor management or poor projections.
In leading software dev orgs. I've been in ones that I had to build up from delivering majority projects under p75 confidence estimates and half of those failing the p50 projection to delivering > 90% in the p75 estimate with 25% in the p90 estimate (a cause for a great celebration!).
I applaud attempting transparency, but that's a double-edged sword - if you do attempt transparency it's always nice to give updated major shifts.
With that said, there are two questions
(a) Do they have an obligation to deliver?
(b) Do they have an obligation to give us dates and meet them?
In regards to (a) - I purchased waiting for this, I might try to subjectively say yes; but the reality is they have zero obligation to deliver anything beyond what we purchased. If the servers were constantly offline then I would say they failed (a) but since everything is running/working and they are fixing bugs they are meeting that fairly well.
In regards to (b) - Hah! No, they have zero obligation to do this. It's nice! It's customer obsessed! It's wholly illogical! I believe Neil Gaiman summed it up here with: journal.neilgaiman.com/2009/05/entitlement-issues.html; I don't think that people here are asking out of entitlement though, just out of curiosity and excitement.
If I were mods I'd probably just threadlock it and say: We don't know, we're trying to get it done, it may be tomorrow, it may be next year - which is the honest answer (I mean, it's exactly what just happened) and at least that gives people less false hope and just sets proper expectations. <-- I think part of this was done earlier by Joe but in a 'we want to be transparent' with caveats way instead of direct.