'Now I think that one of the other problems was the perceptions of what they were doing. The perception was, really until the end that they were simply updating the system. The user environment, the perception was this was relatively minor changes. Whereas in practice, what it was, was a complete system rewrite.X064 page 001.03 (tape 04.1.04) Stuart Notes/Tape 14/10/94... I'm not sure because I wasn't involved until the end, but I think what..firstly it was a completely new database structure and the fact that it was a completely new database structure meant that, ... they had to, well rewrite most of the system because the tables were different, the names were different, the actual way the processing was carried out was different and I think it was a sort of creeping rewrite, I don't think it started out as "OK let's rewrite the system, do it now", but I think that is essentially what happened. ...
Also it was a new version of Powerbuilder as well ... And obviously ... because the database was a kind of typical prototyping database, it was creaking and had spurious fields all over it. Yes, it was much more a long term build of the system. This is a version of the system that we can build on, last for several years rather than the one which had really been, as prototyped things are, pieced together, bits dropped out of it, bits put in. A more sort of patchwork type system, the first version.'
Social influence: | |
Technical influence: | Tasks: Software implementation |
![]() |
Recording |
![]() |
![]() |
Story |
![]() |
Social influence | ||
![]() |
Technical influence |
![]() |
© Clare Tagg 2000