Skip to main content

Quality Assurance at Apple


For this week’s blog for quality assurance and testing, I decided to read an article from Wired Magazine that focused less on the testing process itself and more of how a company can benefit from it. The article I chose is a little less than a year old about Apple’s securities and vulnerabilities. The article confirms some of what I had hoped — that Apple still has a strong reputation for security. However, some vulnerabilities have damaged how the company is perceived by many. 

In High Sierra, all that you had to do to gain root access was type the word “root.” They fixed it impressively quickly. However, the article wonders if the security flaws like this are emblematic of deeper problems. There have been many more bugs and vulnerabilities found, such as wonky autocorrect on the iPhone. Although not every bug (like the autocorrect) is not always a security issue, it is incredibly irritating. 

One advantage that Apple has over its competitors is that most of its customers update as soon as there is an update. The advantage of this is that people will not be vulnerable using a software without the security fixes in the update. However, Apple might lose this edge if people are wary of updating if it seems like there are always too many bugs in every update.

One of the big problems these days is that it seems that everything seems rushed out. There is a big focus on new features, and not as much focus on fixing the bugs on the features that already exist. The article talked about a 2009 release of “Snow Leopard” which built on the previous release “Leopard.” It heavily focused on getting bugs fixed.

Another issue about perceptions is that even if the mistakes are fixed quite promptly, they are still remembered, with what is described as a pile-on effect. That is, a fixed security flaw won’t be “erased” from a customer’s mind.

The takeaway from all of this is how important quality assurance is to any product. It perhaps is more important than new features. If the old and new features are continuously full of bugs, it is hard for a customer to trust that company anymore. It is better to have solid core software than one with a million extra bells and whistles if it means there’s just as many bugs. Unfortunately, the article concluded that it seems like Apple is leaning towards the latter.

https://www.wired.com/story/apples-security-macos-high-sierra-ios-11/
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sprint 5 Retrospective (Capstone)

It is a shame that we are so close to the end of the semester. We were gaining so much momentum. It took us a while for us to get off the ground, but once we did, we never stopped gaining speed. I feel we will be able to keep this up through this last sprint. My hopes at the beginning of the semester for what we could accomplish were unrealistically high, but I am not disappointed with what we accomplished. We have not completed a full working component quite yet, but we are very close. I think our efforts are best spent finishing the one we are currently working on and doing it right. If we divided our efforts into starting something new, we run the risk of not fully completing anything. In the sage words of Ron Swanson, “Never half-ass two things. Whole-ass one thing.” If we are able to get the tabs working beautifully, I will be happy with our effort. I have felt that our group has done a phenomenal job this sprint and every sprint before with our communication. We have a few ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Testing: Like Destroying Sandcastles

https://joecolantonio.com/testtalks/223-testing-dream-journaling-smashing-sand-castles-with-noemi-ferrera/ In this blog for software quality assurance and testing, I decided to return to the “Test Talks” podcast, presented by Joe Colantonio, for another episode (#223). In it, he sat down with Noemi Ferrera, a software tester for a Chinese mobile gaming company to get her take on the subject. Noemi gave a few interesting metaphors that I appreciated for how to look at testing. In one, she gave the example of going to a movie where you had already read the book. It was different than how you imagined it while reading it, and testing is a way of making the “movie version” fit the way you envisioned it playing out.  The other metaphor for testing that she gave was, if you were children at the beach, the developers would be the ones building the sandcastles, whereas the testers would be the ones destroying them. I don’t know if that would be the most accurate way of lookin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Apprenticeship Pattern “Practice, Practice, Practice”

The apprenticeship pattern framed the problem is that if you do not have room to make mistakes in your day to day programming, you will not have room to grow. The next line hit close to home, “It’s as if you’re always on stage.” I learn quite a bit from my school assignments, but I don’t always think I have mastered each area before moving on to the next topic. The problem arises when I know my code could be improved upon, but it’s currently working. I don’t want to restructure my code too much, because I’m afraid of making it worse. The term comes to mind, “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” I have problems with this way of thinking, but when you’re pressed to make something work before the impending deadline, “good enough” is sometimes feels like the only option I have left. This pattern champions a different approach to this kind of mentality. I like the idealized version that they have laid out based on the research of K. Anders Ericsson. This describes where a mentor would ass...
Post a Comment
Read more