<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d7181760\x26blogName\x3dOffpoint+-+From+Singapore+To+Seattle\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://offpoint.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://offpoint.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d3440834863657495644', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>
Monday, August 22, 2005
fun project updates
i'm in this super huge project that more or less determines how good everyone's "review" will be in end of FY 2006... the fun thing about this project is that events are happening in reverse mode.. kinda like Irreversible... wah.

The feeling of dread is there too.

A figure, quoted by a hongkonger PM today, as being dropped down from the sky, was used as the make-or-break goal for the project. Apparently, no one asked the people that use the system (aka my mentor and/or me or even our managers) about it.

So now... all data points point to the fact that it can't be done. full stop. No technical solutions that they can provide within this project timeline is going to make the committment of 99.9% within the goal. Thankfully, the developers are finally seeing the pain points that i have in this current system.

One common phrase that i use to explain to the skeptical.. "size DOESN"T MATTER".. and it always raise a chuckle or two. There was so much focus on size that what is witin the size was not initially considered.

So... i gave a group of testers some realistic file samples, and now they come to the same conclusion that i have... for once.

You'd think that this kind of testing should be done prior to the project. What's worse is that we have now multiple independent business process consultants that are engaged to walk through the same system, the same pain points, the same data with me. Already, most of them are seeing the same picture.... I keep asking the question "what's the value of all these analysis AFTER THE FACT?" and no one dare to tell me.

One common desired outcome, not from my dept, is to cut down on the number of scanners. I was so pissed with this suggestion. If reducing the scanners is the best way, why not make it the only way? Why not use one single scanner, or ditch scanning.. just like the way the real print quality checks were ditched.

Just copy the damn files from one machine to another and every single job will meet the goals. 8).
posted by Jonathan at 11:41 PM | Permalink |