Agile often allows no time for doing it right, leading to high levels of technical debt. In the end it leads to Rube Goldberg machines and the "big ball of mud." It's suitable for prototyping but often fails for producing quality software.
The nastiest balls of glued together snot I have ever seen were almost all from textbook Scrum shops. The rest were from lowest bidder outsourcers that probably use similar management methods to try to get code from bad or underpaid/unmotivated coders.
The problem is that deep conceptual thought about a design and deep refactoring are hard to capture as a ticket item. Quality is something that perfuses all deliverables but is not itself a deliverable.
Agile is also totally unsuited for innovation. You will never get a Xerox Parc or SRI with agile. You can only make what you already know to make with agile.
Comments
Agile often allows no time for doing it right, leading to high levels of technical debt. In the end it leads to Rube Goldberg machines and the "big ball of mud." It's suitable for prototyping but often fails for producing quality software.
The nastiest balls of glued together snot I have ever seen were almost all from textbook Scrum shops. The rest were from lowest bidder outsourcers that probably use similar management methods to try to get code from bad or underpaid/unmotivated coders.
The problem is that deep conceptual thought about a design and deep refactoring are hard to capture as a ticket item. Quality is something that perfuses all deliverables but is not itself a deliverable.
Agile is also totally unsuited for innovation. You will never get a Xerox Parc or SRI with agile. You can only make what you already know to make with agile.
This should be the top ranked comment!