>That's a GOOD reason > for > not having common metrics. Even the same metric, when the > > measurement can be supplied, doesn't mean the same thing > in > different contexts. We measure speed for both cars and > airplanes. But we don't expect the same speed out of a > Mercedes as a 767 - or a helicopter. And airplanes have > metrics that don't apply to cars, like rate-of-climb, > service ceiling; likewise cars are measured for stopping > distance, which differs in meaning from a landing > requirement.
I agree that context is important and that it may make no sense to compare the speed of cars to that of airplanes (or alligators). But top (or cruising) speed is used to compare airplanes in the same category (e.g. commercial airliners, jet fighters) against each other. I also don't expect to use MPG to compare a Ferrari to a Prius, but I do expect to use MPG to compare a Prius to other fuel-efficient cars.
I am not arguing that all software should be held to the same standard wrt any given metric. For example, I expect that medical applications to be more thoroughly tested than, say, a video game. But I am surprised that we don't have any metric that's used with any consistency to compare applications in the same category.
Alberto
Flat View: This topic has 50 replies
on 51 pages
[
«
|
8910111213141516
|
»
]