Software Tester Quotes

Software testing is a sport like hunting, it's bughunting.

Most testers I’ve known are perverse enough that if you tell them the “happy path” through the application, that’s the last thing they’ll do. It should be the same with load testing.

Some upstarts always try to get closer to the source of creation by ascending to the source's level. The story of Icarus is of course a parable about the folly of such an effort. Get too close to the sun and your hubris will get you burned. Yet in the eyes of twenty-first-century capitalist culture, which worships at the twin altars of the individual and technology, Icarus had initiative. And his melted wings do not represent some deep character flaw; he just needed better beta testers.

The Joel Test 1. Do you use source control? 2. Can you make a build in one step? 3. Do you make daily builds? 4. Do you have a bug database? 5. Do you fix bugs before writing new code? 6. Do you have an up-to-date schedule? 7. Do you have a spec? 8. Do programmers have quiet working conditions? 9. Do you use the best tools money can buy? 10. Do you have testers? 11. Do new candidates write code during their interview? 12. Do you do hallway usability testing?

How can we hope to catch all the configuration options in an entire system? At some level we can’t, and this is at the heart of what professional testers do.

The job of a tester is to prove that the software is bug free, while it has to be the other way around: The job of a tester is to prove that the software is broken. The better testers are doing their jobs, the more bugs they manage to find and report.

Or, suppose you want to motivate your managers to ship products on time, so you conspicuously promote each manager whose product goes out the door on schedule. All goes as planned until the situation arises in which one of your managers has a project where the testers are reporting numerous problems. Because managers who have shipped products on time have been promoted, this manager thinks, I want that promotion so I need to ship this on time, but those bug reports are getting in the way. I know what I'll do! I'll put the testers on another project until the developers have a chance to catch up.

Software development requires the cooperation of everyone on the team. Programmers are often called “developers,” but in reality everyone on the team is part of the development effort. When you share the work, customers identify the next requirements while programmers work on the current ones. Testers help the team figure out how to stop introducing bugs. Programmers spread the cost of technical infrastructure over the entire life of the project. Above all, everyone helps keep everything clean.

Hiring highly technical testers was only step one. We still needed to get developers involved. One of the key ways we did this was by a program called Test Certified. In retrospect, the program was instrumental in getting the developer-testing culture ingrained at Google.

If your teams have no visibility into code deployments—that is, if you ask your teams what software deployments are like and the answer is, “I don’t know . . . I’ve never thought about it!”—that’s another warning that software delivery performance could be low, because if developers or testers aren’t aware of the deployment process, there are probably barriers hiding the work from them.

SETs are the engineers involved in enabling testing at all levels of the Google development process we just described. SETs are Software Engineers in Test. First and foremost, SETs are software engineers and the role is touted as a 100 percent coding role in our recruiting literature and internal job promotion ladders. It’s an interesting hybrid approach to testing that enables us to get testers involved early in a way that’s not about touchy-feely “quality models” and “test plans” but as active participants in designing and creating the codebase. It creates an equal footing between feature developers and test developers that is productive and lends credibility to all types of testing, including manual and exploratory testing that occurs later in the process and is performed by a different set of engineers.

Specifically, engineering roles that enable developers to do testing efficiently and effectively have to exist. At Google, we have created roles in which some engineers are responsible for making other engineers more productive and more quality-minded. These engineers often identify themselves as testers, but their actual mission is one of productivity. Testers are there to make developers more productive and a large part of that productivity is avoiding re-work because of sloppy development. Quality is thus a large part of that productivity. We are going to spend significant time talking about each of these roles in detail in subsequent

In many ways, being a good tester is harder than being a good developer because testing requires not only a very good understanding of of the development process and its products, but it also demands an ability to anticipate likely faults and errors

does not replace the role of a traditional software tester. It

Dedicated QA teams are an anti-pattern. Testers should find nothing. Zero. Nada.

Most software is designed for the development lab or the testers in the Quality Assurance (QA) department.

The best representation of automation test execution scheduling is possible through Bar Charts when multiple Automation Testers are involved in the test project.

Women in technology are stereotyped. Many men—and some women—often assume that a female programmer is not going to be as technically competent. A woman in technology can also be thought of as either not as passionate or dedicated as a man, or seen as a geeky anomaly who isn’t very feminine, but hangs with the guys and plays Zelda. Women are often thought to be good testers, but not taken as seriously in software developer roles.

At Google, the software engineers work for Google, but the recruiters, product testers, and administrators work for contractors hired by the tech giant. Google relies more on temps and contract workers than on full-time employees. Of the roughly 750,000 workers around the globe who help make and sell Apple products, only around 63,000 work directly for Apple.

A common pattern for teams that start with test automation, or development groups that start breaking down silos between testers and developers, is to take existing manual tests and automate them. Unless it’s a training exercise for an automation tool, this is almost always a bad idea.

Software testing is not only ensuring absence of bugs but also ensuring presence of value.

Quality is a product of a conflict between programmers and testers.

BITE stands for Browser Integrated Test Environment. BITE is an experiment in bringing as much of the testing activity, testing tools, and testing data into the browser and cloud as possible, and showing this information in context. The goal is to reduce distraction and make the testing work more efficient. A fair amount of tester time and mental energy is spent doing all this manually.

BITE tries to address many of these issues and lets the engineer focus on actual exploratory and regression testing—not the process and mechanics. Modern jet fighters have dealt with this information overload problem by building Heads Up Displays (HUDs). HUDs streamline information and put it in context, right over the pilot’s field of view. Much like moving from propeller-driven aircraft to jets, the frequency with which we ship new versions of software at Google also adds to the amount of data and the premium on the speed at which we can make decisions. We’ve taken a similar approach with BITE for regression and manual testing. We implemented BITE as a browser extension because it allows us to watch what the tester is doing (see Figure 3.35) and examine the inside of the web application (DOM). It also enables us to project a unified user experience in the toolbar for quick access to data while overlaying that data on the web application at the same time, much like a HUD.

Scarcity of resources brings clarity to execution and it creates a strong sense of ownership by those on a project. Imagine raising a child with a large staff of help: one person for feeding, one for diapering, one for entertainment, and so on. None of these people is as vested in the child’s life as a single, overworked parent. It is the scarcity of the parenting resource that brings clarity and efficiency to the process of raising children. When resources are scarce, you are forced to optimize. You are quick to see process inefficiencies and not repeat them. You create a feeding schedule and stick to it. You place the various diapering implements in close proximity to streamline steps in the process. It’s the same concept for software-testing projects at Google. Because you can’t simply throw people at a problem, the tool chain gets streamlined. Automation that serves no real purpose gets deprecated. Tests that find no regressions aren’t written. Developers who demand certain types of activity from testers have to participate in it. There are no make-work tasks. There is no busy work in an attempt to add value where you are not needed.

It takes a diverse family of testers to raise an amazing product.

Leading and managing testers at Google is likely the thing most different from other testing shops. There are several forces at work at Google driving these differences, namely: far fewer testers, hiring competent folks, and a healthy respect for diversity and autonomy. Test management at Google is much more about inspiring than actively managing. It is more about strategy than day-to-day or week-to-week execution. That said, this leaves engineering management in an open-ended and often more complex position than that typical of the places we’ve worked before. The key aspects of test management and leadership at Google are leadership and vision, negotiation, external communication, technical competence, strategic initiatives, recruiting and interviewing, and driving the review performance of the team.

Protection relays and substation automation equipment control and protect essential resources during ordinary activity and flaw conditions, making them imperative to arrange dependability. We offers relay testing service administrations as indicated by global norms for these key segments. A protection relay might be called without hesitation just once in a while if at all. Be that as it may, on the off chance that it doesn't work accurately when required, there could be shocking consequences for the vitality supply and public safety. Then again, a protection relay that switches when not required could have colossal financial effect. After some time, transfers have advanced from electromechanical to computerize. This has expanded their usefulness yet in addition their affectability to nature, making powerful testing both all the more testing and progressively significant. So, the question is what are Relays? Relays are only distinct gadgets that have been utilized to permit low power logic signs to control a much high power circuit. This is accomplished predominantly by giving a small electromagnetic curl to the rationale circuit to control. Its fundamental capacity requires another degree of refined test equipment and software to totally dissect the activity of the unit in a "reality" circumstance. Each part of relay testing could be dealt with a far reaching line of hand-off relay test equipment. Significances of this tester: A kind of relay tester is the computer-supported relay testing hardware that has been included with high power limit with regards to its present amplifiers. It is the perfect relay testing answer for applications where huge current yield is required.

Developers should get feedback from a more comprehensive suite of acceptance and performance tests every day. Furthermore, current builds should be available to testers for exploratory testing.

At Google, this is exactly our goal: to merge development and testing so that you cannot do one without the other. Build a little and then test it. Build some more and test some more. The key here is who is doing the testing. Because the number of actual dedicated testers at Google is so disproportionately low, the only possible answer has to be the developer. Who better to do all that testing than the people doing the actual coding? Who better to find the bug than the person who wrote it? Who is more incentivized to avoid writing the bug in the first place? The reason Google can get by with so few dedicated testers is because developers own quality. If a product breaks in the field, the first point of escalation is the developer who created the problem, not the tester who didn’t catch it.

With the advent of wireless networking, the Windows Registry stores information related to the wireless connection. Understanding the location and meaning of these registry keys can provide us with geo-location information about where a laptop has been. From Windows Vista on, the Registry stores each of the networks in subkey under HKLM\ SOFTWARE\ Microsoft\ Windows NT\ CurrentVersion\ NetworkList\ Signatures\ Unmanaged.