Hello folks ! Yes, software testing is moving towards the future!
And recently the positive developments are going very fast too.
And recently the positive developments are going very fast too.
The number of blogs and articles with really good content on Twitter or LinkedIn last weeks was really eye-catching! Thanks colleagues and other test professionals.
The best article I read this week had a subjtect that was really advanced thinking about software testing to my opinion. ('checking and exploratory work are not antithetical').
So why is it that i'm naming this article the title 'software testing is moving towards the future!'
Reason 1: Test automation tools are getting better by the day. I've seen more cool features, new functionalities, wider support for more devices. Etcetera. But in general, the quality of test automation tools is improving and it is improving FAST!
Reason 2: There has been a long couple of years where the market was asking for a certain type of 'generalist'/'allround' software tester.
But recently the recruiters are asking better specific questions.
New companies supplying CV's of test candidates are visibly showing on their websites that they know that a security tester is not the same as a performance tester! Which to my opinion is a very good thing. We need test specialists in many different area's.
Reason 3: (And this is the best reason). There seems to be a growing positive insights (at software building companies) that a computer(tool) will never test in the same way and find the same bugs as a human.
The best article I read this week had a subjtect that was really advanced thinking about software testing to my opinion. ('checking and exploratory work are not antithetical').
So why is it that i'm naming this article the title 'software testing is moving towards the future!'
Reason 1: Test automation tools are getting better by the day. I've seen more cool features, new functionalities, wider support for more devices. Etcetera. But in general, the quality of test automation tools is improving and it is improving FAST!
Reason 2: There has been a long couple of years where the market was asking for a certain type of 'generalist'/'allround' software tester.
But recently the recruiters are asking better specific questions.
New companies supplying CV's of test candidates are visibly showing on their websites that they know that a security tester is not the same as a performance tester! Which to my opinion is a very good thing. We need test specialists in many different area's.
Reason 3: (And this is the best reason). There seems to be a growing positive insights (at software building companies) that a computer(tool) will never test in the same way and find the same bugs as a human.
A) Only a human will test the software. This scenario would have a certain effect on the type of bugs that will be found, the amount, etcetera.
B) Only a test automation tool will (re-)test the software.
If you'd apply this scenario then this would also have a certain effect on the software bugs that will be found.
C) A human and the test automation tool will (re-)test the software.
This will also have a certain impact on the amount of bugs, the type of bugs and other.
B) Only a test automation tool will (re-)test the software.
If you'd apply this scenario then this would also have a certain effect on the software bugs that will be found.
C) A human and the test automation tool will (re-)test the software.
This will also have a certain impact on the amount of bugs, the type of bugs and other.
So are these the only 3 ways! Of course not! the possibilities are endless. What to think of the scenario:
- let a human test (18 years old),
then let another human test. (85 years old)
- Let 2 humans test at the same time and compare the results.
- Let the computer test and then let the computer test again.
Be creative and you can go on-and-on...
what is it i'm trying to say with the example above?
What i'm trying to say is this:
(methaphor)
There has been some years where people wanted their news and read it in the morning on the tabled, Phone or computer.
('Everyone wanted the latest test automation tools.')
But lately there is a development going on that reading the news in the newspaper wasn't such a bad thing afterall.
There will always be books.
('We will always need the opinion/insights/judgement of a human when testing software').
(regardsless how good the test automation tools will ever get).
Now, here is why you wanted to read this article! (Here is where it gets really interesting!)
Remember I wrote in this blog that i read a blog/article with the content 'checking and exploratory work are not anthitetical?'
The reason I find this article most interesting is because you can apply that thought/vision/insights on the A,B,C, picture I made.
So *hypothetically you could say (*if they would have been antithetical):
What i'm trying to say is this:
(methaphor)
There has been some years where people wanted their news and read it in the morning on the tabled, Phone or computer.
('Everyone wanted the latest test automation tools.')
But lately there is a development going on that reading the news in the newspaper wasn't such a bad thing afterall.
There will always be books.
('We will always need the opinion/insights/judgement of a human when testing software').
(regardsless how good the test automation tools will ever get).
Now, here is why you wanted to read this article! (Here is where it gets really interesting!)
Remember I wrote in this blog that i read a blog/article with the content 'checking and exploratory work are not anthitetical?'
The reason I find this article most interesting is because you can apply that thought/vision/insights on the A,B,C, picture I made.
So *hypothetically you could say (*if they would have been antithetical):
- I'll let the computer mainly check, and let the human focus on explore.
- I'll let the computer explore, and let the human check+explore.
- I'll let the Artificial Intelligence software 'check and explore' and the human also 'check and explore'.
- I'll let only the Artificial Intelligence software 80% focus on check and 20% check on discovering new things. (or the other way around).
I hope this blog inspires you to think about software testing this way in a wider/broader vision.
Think in terms like: 'What would be the effect if this was the case!'.
Every of the above given scenario's of testing the software would have a different effect on what and how it will be found!
The next step is:
How to decide what the best approach (*scenario) would be?
(*Is it wise to say to a human : your goal/focus is strictly: 'check on the 4 requirements' and dump all other information!/findings ?
probably not very wise, right?)
and
How could we best implement/apply this choice in the test process (Agile process)?
Because if every choice has a different impact on what, how, how many bugs, etc will be found... Then probably every chosen scenario will have a different kind of effect on the Product Backlog And /or Sprint Backlog. (and/or test througput time).
(Stay tuned because my visions on (how best to cope) that part will be soon online too!) twitter.com/testensoftware
Think in terms like: 'What would be the effect if this was the case!'.
Every of the above given scenario's of testing the software would have a different effect on what and how it will be found!
The next step is:
How to decide what the best approach (*scenario) would be?
(*Is it wise to say to a human : your goal/focus is strictly: 'check on the 4 requirements' and dump all other information!/findings ?
probably not very wise, right?)
and
How could we best implement/apply this choice in the test process (Agile process)?
Because if every choice has a different impact on what, how, how many bugs, etc will be found... Then probably every chosen scenario will have a different kind of effect on the Product Backlog And /or Sprint Backlog. (and/or test througput time).
(Stay tuned because my visions on (how best to cope) that part will be soon online too!) twitter.com/testensoftware
