These PPT presentation help to understand waterfall model in SDLC. The Waterfall model is the earliest SDLC approach that was used for software development. There are five steps in the waterfall model.
These PPT presentation help to understand waterfall model in SDLC. The Waterfall model is the earliest SDLC approach that was used for software development. There are five steps in the waterfall model.
SDLC [sometimes termed as Systems Development Life-cycle] is an acronym for Software Development Life Cycle which follows a systematic process to unravel a software while following problem handling methodologies and analysis.
Learn how and what is Spiral Model. This was made during 3RD Year. From Eastern Visayas State University - Main Campus, Tacloban City, Leyte, Philippines
CREATED BY:
Aguilar, Fatima Joy
Arpon, Benedict Julius Steven
Learn about Propotype Model and how to use it. This was made during our 3rd Year in Eastern Visayas State University - Main Campus, Tacloban City, Leyte
Created by:
Acejo, Rhealyn
Udtohan, Noemi
Iterative model.
Spiral model
RAD(Rapid application development)
model.
Iterative model.
Spiral model
RAD(Rapid application development)
model.
A Water Fall Model is easy to flow.
It can be implemented for any size of project.
Every stage has to be done separately at the right time so you cannot jump stages.
Documentation is produced at every stage of a waterfall model allowing people to understand what has been done.
Testing is done at every stage.
This model was not the first model to discuss iterative development.
As originally envisioned, the iterations were typically 6 months to 2 years long.
Each phase starts with a design goal and ends with the client (who may be internal) reviewing the progress thus far.
Analysis and engineering efforts are applied at each phase of the project, with an eye toward the end goal of the project.
This model was not the first model to discuss iterative development.
As originally envisioned, the iterations were typically 6 months to 2 years long.
Each phase starts with a design goal and ends with the client (who may be internal) reviewing the progress thus far.
Analysis and engineering efforts are applied at each phase of the project, with an eye toward the end goal of the project.
This model was not the first model to discuss iterative development.
As originally envisioned, the iterations were typically 6 months to 2 years long.
Each phase starts with a design goal and ends with the client (who may be internal) reviewing the progress thus far.
Analysis and engineering efforts are applied at each phase of the project, with an eye toward the end goal of the project.
This approach carries less risk than a traditional Waterfall approach but is still far more risky and less efficient than a more Agile approaches.
In Iterative model, iterative process starts with a simple implementation of a small set of the software requirements and iteratively enhances the evolving versions until the complete system is implemented and ready to be deployed.
Iterative model.
Spiral model
RAD(Rapid application development)
model.
The first formal description of the waterfall model is often cited as a 1970 article by Winston W. Royce
Royce did not use the term "waterfall" in this article.
Royce presented this model as an example of a flawed, non-working model.
Understanding the Waterfall Model in Software Development Life CycleDev Software
If you're new to software development, you might be curious about the different models used in the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). The Waterfall model is one of the oldest and most widely used SDLC models. In this article, we will explore the Waterfall model, its advantages and disadvantages, and when it is appropriate to use it in the SDLC.
A Software System Development Life Cycle Model for Improved Students Communic...IJCSES Journal
Software engineering provides methodologies, concepts and practices, which are used for analyzing,designing, building and maintaining the information in a software industry. Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) model is an approach used in the software industry for the development of various size
projects: small scale projects, medium scale projects and large scale projects. A software project of any size is developed with the co-ordination of development team. It is therefore important to assign resources intelligently to the different phases of the software project by the project manager. This study proposes a
model for the spiral development process with the use of a simulator (Simphony.NET), which helps the project manager in determining how to increase the productivity of a software firm with the use of minimum resources (expert team members). This model increase the utilization of different development
processes by keeping all development team members busy all the time, which helps in decreasing idle and waste time.
SDLC [sometimes termed as Systems Development Life-cycle] is an acronym for Software Development Life Cycle which follows a systematic process to unravel a software while following problem handling methodologies and analysis.
Learn how and what is Spiral Model. This was made during 3RD Year. From Eastern Visayas State University - Main Campus, Tacloban City, Leyte, Philippines
CREATED BY:
Aguilar, Fatima Joy
Arpon, Benedict Julius Steven
Learn about Propotype Model and how to use it. This was made during our 3rd Year in Eastern Visayas State University - Main Campus, Tacloban City, Leyte
Created by:
Acejo, Rhealyn
Udtohan, Noemi
Iterative model.
Spiral model
RAD(Rapid application development)
model.
Iterative model.
Spiral model
RAD(Rapid application development)
model.
A Water Fall Model is easy to flow.
It can be implemented for any size of project.
Every stage has to be done separately at the right time so you cannot jump stages.
Documentation is produced at every stage of a waterfall model allowing people to understand what has been done.
Testing is done at every stage.
This model was not the first model to discuss iterative development.
As originally envisioned, the iterations were typically 6 months to 2 years long.
Each phase starts with a design goal and ends with the client (who may be internal) reviewing the progress thus far.
Analysis and engineering efforts are applied at each phase of the project, with an eye toward the end goal of the project.
This model was not the first model to discuss iterative development.
As originally envisioned, the iterations were typically 6 months to 2 years long.
Each phase starts with a design goal and ends with the client (who may be internal) reviewing the progress thus far.
Analysis and engineering efforts are applied at each phase of the project, with an eye toward the end goal of the project.
This model was not the first model to discuss iterative development.
As originally envisioned, the iterations were typically 6 months to 2 years long.
Each phase starts with a design goal and ends with the client (who may be internal) reviewing the progress thus far.
Analysis and engineering efforts are applied at each phase of the project, with an eye toward the end goal of the project.
This approach carries less risk than a traditional Waterfall approach but is still far more risky and less efficient than a more Agile approaches.
In Iterative model, iterative process starts with a simple implementation of a small set of the software requirements and iteratively enhances the evolving versions until the complete system is implemented and ready to be deployed.
Iterative model.
Spiral model
RAD(Rapid application development)
model.
The first formal description of the waterfall model is often cited as a 1970 article by Winston W. Royce
Royce did not use the term "waterfall" in this article.
Royce presented this model as an example of a flawed, non-working model.
Understanding the Waterfall Model in Software Development Life CycleDev Software
If you're new to software development, you might be curious about the different models used in the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). The Waterfall model is one of the oldest and most widely used SDLC models. In this article, we will explore the Waterfall model, its advantages and disadvantages, and when it is appropriate to use it in the SDLC.
A Software System Development Life Cycle Model for Improved Students Communic...IJCSES Journal
Software engineering provides methodologies, concepts and practices, which are used for analyzing,designing, building and maintaining the information in a software industry. Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) model is an approach used in the software industry for the development of various size
projects: small scale projects, medium scale projects and large scale projects. A software project of any size is developed with the co-ordination of development team. It is therefore important to assign resources intelligently to the different phases of the software project by the project manager. This study proposes a
model for the spiral development process with the use of a simulator (Simphony.NET), which helps the project manager in determining how to increase the productivity of a software firm with the use of minimum resources (expert team members). This model increase the utilization of different development
processes by keeping all development team members busy all the time, which helps in decreasing idle and waste time.
The Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) is a methodology or framework used in project management to guide the stages involved in developing an information system or software application. It encompasses the entire process from the initial feasibility study to the maintenance of the completed application.
Comparative Analysis between waterfall model and agile model (for research pa...Azmeen Gadit
This is Comparative analysis between two software model on the basis of flexibility cost resources time and effectiveness the area of our research was karachi and research audience were sqa managers project heads and managers. for research paper contact me on gaditsoftwares@gmail.com
Spiral Model - Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC)ACM-KU
This presentation is about Spiral Model in Software Development models. It includes all of it a bit of it's antiquity, its phases and all the important features.
Similar to Comparison of the Waterfall, Spiral, and Prototype SDLC Models (20)
My action research (capstone) project for my master of science in MIS, on social media data mining, specifically, the skills that are required to obtain work in this field.
A paper for my master's class in decision-making regarding Chord Buddy's recent appearance on the series "Beyond the Tank." Chord Buddy had a decision to make: Keep production in America or send it overseas. I discuss the CEO's decision and the other issues surrounding it.
The final paper for my master's-level class in data communications and networking, discussing the implementation of IPv6 and why it has moved so slowly.
A paper for my data communications and networking class, discussing the evolution of the automobile from a simple machine that got people from Point A to Point B to the highly sophisticated, computerized cars of today.
A paper written for my master's-level class in project management. Discusses four different change management models: Lewin’s Change Management Model, the McKinsey 7-S Model, Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model, and the Kubler-Ross Model, a.k.a. the Change Curve.
A brief paper written for my master's-level course in project management, exploring why projects fail. Uses Avon's "Promise Project" and JC Penney's pricing strategy as examples of spectacular project failures.
We can use political leadership dynamics to understand and model leadership in private sector organizations. A paper written for my master's-level project management course.
This paper, written for my master's level IT Policy & Strategy course, examines the problems PetSmart is currently having, and how an IT project centered around improving the PetPerks program could help the company. Includes a SWOT analysis.
Fictional Business Case for Car Dealership CRMTeresa Rothaar
A business case I wrote for my master's-level class in IT analysis, modeling, and design. The case assumes a fictional automotive dealership with three locations that would like to upgrade its archaic CRM system to an RDBMS. Template courtesy of ProjectManagementDocs.com.
My final paper for my MBA Capstone class, based on "Google's Strategy in 2012" by John E. Gamble. Includes a SWOT analysis and suggestions on how Google can move forward.
Connector Corner: Automate dynamic content and events by pushing a buttonDianaGray10
Here is something new! In our next Connector Corner webinar, we will demonstrate how you can use a single workflow to:
Create a campaign using Mailchimp with merge tags/fields
Send an interactive Slack channel message (using buttons)
Have the message received by managers and peers along with a test email for review
But there’s more:
In a second workflow supporting the same use case, you’ll see:
Your campaign sent to target colleagues for approval
If the “Approve” button is clicked, a Jira/Zendesk ticket is created for the marketing design team
But—if the “Reject” button is pushed, colleagues will be alerted via Slack message
Join us to learn more about this new, human-in-the-loop capability, brought to you by Integration Service connectors.
And...
Speakers:
Akshay Agnihotri, Product Manager
Charlie Greenberg, Host
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 3DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 3. In this session, we will cover desktop automation along with UI automation.
Topics covered:
UI automation Introduction,
UI automation Sample
Desktop automation flow
Pradeep Chinnala, Senior Consultant Automation Developer @WonderBotz and UiPath MVP
Deepak Rai, Automation Practice Lead, Boundaryless Group and UiPath MVP
Neuro-symbolic is not enough, we need neuro-*semantic*Frank van Harmelen
Neuro-symbolic (NeSy) AI is on the rise. However, simply machine learning on just any symbolic structure is not sufficient to really harvest the gains of NeSy. These will only be gained when the symbolic structures have an actual semantics. I give an operational definition of semantics as “predictable inference”.
All of this illustrated with link prediction over knowledge graphs, but the argument is general.
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectKari Kakkonen
My and Rik Marselis slides at 30.5.2024 DASA Connect conference. We discuss about what is testing, then what is agile testing and finally what is Testing in DevOps. Finally we had lovely workshop with the participants trying to find out different ways to think about quality and testing in different parts of the DevOps infinity loop.
Key Trends Shaping the Future of Infrastructure.pdfCheryl Hung
Keynote at DIGIT West Expo, Glasgow on 29 May 2024.
Cheryl Hung, ochery.com
Sr Director, Infrastructure Ecosystem, Arm.
The key trends across hardware, cloud and open-source; exploring how these areas are likely to mature and develop over the short and long-term, and then considering how organisations can position themselves to adapt and thrive.
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder – active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...UiPathCommunity
💥 Speed, accuracy, and scaling – discover the superpowers of GenAI in action with UiPath Document Understanding and Communications Mining™:
See how to accelerate model training and optimize model performance with active learning
Learn about the latest enhancements to out-of-the-box document processing – with little to no training required
Get an exclusive demo of the new family of UiPath LLMs – GenAI models specialized for processing different types of documents and messages
This is a hands-on session specifically designed for automation developers and AI enthusiasts seeking to enhance their knowledge in leveraging the latest intelligent document processing capabilities offered by UiPath.
Speakers:
👨🏫 Andras Palfi, Senior Product Manager, UiPath
👩🏫 Lenka Dulovicova, Product Program Manager, UiPath
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object CalisthenicsDorra BARTAGUIZ
After immersing yourself in the blue book and its red counterpart, attending DDD-focused conferences, and applying tactical patterns, you're left with a crucial question: How do I ensure my design is effective? Tactical patterns within Domain-Driven Design (DDD) serve as guiding principles for creating clear and manageable domain models. However, achieving success with these patterns requires additional guidance. Interestingly, we've observed that a set of constraints initially designed for training purposes remarkably aligns with effective pattern implementation, offering a more ‘mechanical’ approach. Let's explore together how Object Calisthenics can elevate the design of your tactical DDD patterns, offering concrete help for those venturing into DDD for the first time!
Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey 2024 by 91mobiles.pdf91mobiles
91mobiles recently conducted a Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey in which we asked over 3,000 respondents about the TV they own, aspects they look at on a new TV, and their TV buying preferences.
Software Delivery At the Speed of AI: Inflectra Invests In AI-Powered QualityInflectra
In this insightful webinar, Inflectra explores how artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming software development and testing. Discover how AI-powered tools are revolutionizing every stage of the software development lifecycle (SDLC), from design and prototyping to testing, deployment, and monitoring.
Learn about:
• The Future of Testing: How AI is shifting testing towards verification, analysis, and higher-level skills, while reducing repetitive tasks.
• Test Automation: How AI-powered test case generation, optimization, and self-healing tests are making testing more efficient and effective.
• Visual Testing: Explore the emerging capabilities of AI in visual testing and how it's set to revolutionize UI verification.
• Inflectra's AI Solutions: See demonstrations of Inflectra's cutting-edge AI tools like the ChatGPT plugin and Azure Open AI platform, designed to streamline your testing process.
Whether you're a developer, tester, or QA professional, this webinar will give you valuable insights into how AI is shaping the future of software delivery.
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesLaura Byrne
Clients don’t know what they don’t know. What web solutions are right for them? How does WordPress come into the picture? How do you make sure you understand scope and timeline? What do you do if sometime changes?
All these questions and more will be explored as we talk about matching clients’ needs with what your agency offers without pulling teeth or pulling your hair out. Practical tips, and strategies for successful relationship building that leads to closing the deal.
AI for Every Business: Unlocking Your Product's Universal Potential by VP of ...
Comparison of the Waterfall, Spiral, and Prototype SDLC Models
1. Running Head: THE WATERFALL, SPIRAL, AND PROTOTYPE SDLC MODELS 1
A Comparison of the Waterfall, Spiral, and Prototype SDLC Models
Teresa J. Rothaar
Wilmington University
2. THE WATERFALL, SPIRAL, AND PROTOTYPE SDLC MODELS 2
A Comparison of the Waterfall, Spiral, and Prototype SDLC Models
Introduction
There are numerous software/systems development lifecycle (SDLC) models. According
to Ruparelia (2010), each SDLC model can be classified in one of three categories: linear,
iterative, or a combination of both. Linear models are sequential; each stage automatically leads
into the next, and stages are not revisited or repeated. Iterative models are structured around the
idea that the SDLC is a continuous process, and each stage will be revisited multiple times
during the life of the project. A combined model is an iterative model with a finish line: It
acknowledges that, at some point, there will be no more need to revisit any of the stages (p. 8).
This paper will compare and contrast three popular SDLC models: waterfall, spiral, and
prototype.
The Waterfall Model
The term “waterfall” refers to a methodology as well as a model; software engineers
often use the term interchangeably (C. Seifer, personal communication, March 18, 2015). There
are actually two waterfall models: the traditional, linear model and a newer, iterative model.
Each model has five steps: requirements analysis, design, implementation, testing, and
maintenance (Maheshwari & Jain, 2012, p. 286).
In the traditional waterfall model, each step flows into the other sequentially. While some
“splash back” is permitted, the goal of the model is to move through each phase and onto the
next without repeating, with an “emphasis … on planning, time schedules, target dates, budgets
and implementation of an entire system at one time” (Maheshwari & Jain, 2012, p. 286). This
method is highly structured, with well-defined deliverables and milestones for each phase, which
make it easy to understand. However, the tight structure of the original waterfall model—in
3. THE WATERFALL, SPIRAL, AND PROTOTYPE SDLC MODELS 3
particular, the need to consider and plan for every possible eventuality at the beginning of the
project—has caused it to fall out of favor in today’s dynamic business environment. Often, the
project sponsor may not know exactly what they want at the outset, or, in the case of a large
project being done over a long period of time, something may change in the macro environment
that requires changes to the project (Maheshwari & Jain, 2012, p. 286).
Enter the iterative waterfall model. The steps are the same as in the traditional waterfall
method, but with testing and analysis at the end of each phase, which theoretically provides
valuable feedback when moving into the next phase. Additionally, unlike in the traditional
model, it is expected that phases will be repeated. The advantage of this model is that it is better
suited to the dynamic world of modern software and systems development; however, it lacks the
clear milestones of the original model and, thus, could be difficult to manage (Maheshwari &
Jain, 2012, p. 286-287).
The Spiral Model
Among the most flexible of SDLC models is the spiral model (Saxena & Kaushik, 2013,
p. 118), which is a combination of the traditional waterfall model and the prototype model
(Khurana & Gupta, 2012, p. 1516). It has four phases: requirements planning, risk analysis,
development and testing, and planning the next iteration. At the end of the risk analysis phase, a
prototype is produced, which is coded and tested in the third phase, then evaluated in the fourth
phase; feedback from this iteration is used to plan the next one. The hallmark of the spiral model
is its emphasis on risk analysis and mitigation, which makes it particularly suitable for very
large, costly projects (Khurana & Gupta, 2012, p. 1515-1516).
Figure 1 (Aafrin, 2012) visually demonstrates the similarities and differences between the
traditional waterfall and spiral models. The steps are very similar. However, while each step
4. THE WATERFALL, SPIRAL, AND PROTOTYPE SDLC MODELS 4
“falls” into the next when using waterfall, the spiral method keeps going around the “spiral” as
many times as necessary. While the method is considered iterative, it can be used as a
combination method, as eventually, the project will be finished and there will be no need to go
through further iterations:
Figure 1. A visual representation of the difference between the linear waterfall model and
the iterative spiral model.
The spiral model is not suitable for every project. Saxena and Kaushik (2013) note that,
among other drawbacks, it is very expensive and highly complex; there is no specified “finish
line,” and it can be difficult to determine when to stop going through the iterations; and it
requires that project managers have a high level of expertise in risk management. Thus, they
recommend that it be used only for large, highly complex, risky, and expensive projects (p. 118).
The Prototype Model
According to Maheshwari and Jain (2012), the prototype (or prototyping) model isn’t
solely a standalone model, though it can be used as one; it is an approach that can be
incorporated into any SDLC model (p. 287). For example, as discussed above, prototyping is an
5. THE WATERFALL, SPIRAL, AND PROTOTYPE SDLC MODELS 5
important part of the spiral model. Shukla and Saxena (2013) break the prototype model down
into six steps: requirements gathering; initial designing of the prototype; building the prototype;
having the client evaluate the prototype; refining the prototype; and finally, building the end
product (p. 19). As Figure 2 (ISTQB Exam Certification, 2012) illustrates, prototyping is a linear
method, like waterfall, with a beginning and an end:
Figure 2. A diagram of the prototype model.
Because it requires building a working model (which could end up being discarded), the
prototype model is expensive; however, it’s not as expensive as the spiral model (Shukla &
Saxena, 2013, p. 19). Other advantages include the fact that the client gets to see a working
model early in the project, which makes it easier for the client to make improvement suggestions,
may make it easier to get the project funded, and mitigates risk. However, costs can be high. The
development process can be slow, and as mentioned above, once feedback is received from the
client regarding the initial prototype, it may end up being useless. Additionally, the prototype
model encourages a lot of communication between the client and the developer; while this is
helpful in ensuring the client is happy with the final product, a non-technical client may expect
the moon and become upset when the developer cannot deliver on all requests as quickly and
inexpensively as the client thinks they should (Saxena & Kaushik, 2013, p. 119). Shukla and
Saxena (2013) recommend using this method only for small projects (p. 19).
6. THE WATERFALL, SPIRAL, AND PROTOTYPE SDLC MODELS 6
Conclusion
This paper discussed three popular SDLC models; many more exist. All of them include
phases for gathering requirements, performing a business analysis, designing the system,
implementing the system, and performing QA testing (Mishra & Dubey, 2013, p. 64). There is
no one “correct” model; all of them do the same thing, but use different problem-solving
approaches. The decision to choose one model over the other is dependent on the particular
situation under which an individual project is being developed.
7. THE WATERFALL, SPIRAL, AND PROTOTYPE SDLC MODELS 7
References
Aafrin (2012). Waterfall Model vs. Spiral Model [Online image]. Retrieved from
http://www.aafrin.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/waterfall-spiral-model.png
ISTQB Exam Certification (2012). Prototyping Model [Online image]. Retrieved from
http://istqbexamcertification.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Prototype-model.jpg
Khurana, G., & Gupta, S. (2012). Study & Comparison of Software Development Life Cycle
Models. International Journal of Research in Engineering & Applied Sciences, 2(2),
1513-1521. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/8608736/STUDY_and_COMPARISON_OF_SOFTWARE_D
EVELOPMENT_LIFE_CYCLE_MODELS
Maheshwari, S., & Jain, D. C. (2012). A Comparative Analysis of Different Types of Models in
Software Development Life Cycle. International Journal of Advanced Research in
Computer Science and Software Engineering, 2(5), 285-290. Retrieved from
http://www.ijarcsse.com/docs/papers/May2012/Volum2_issue5/V2I500405.pdf
Mishra, A., & Dubey, D. (2013). A Comparative Study of Different Software Development Life
Cycle Models in Different Scenarios. International Journal, 1(5), 64-69. Retrieved from
http://www.ijarcsms.com/docs/paper/volume1/issue5/V1I5-0008.pdf
Ruparelia, N. B. (2010). Software development lifecycle models. ACM SIGSOFT Software
Engineering Notes, 35(3), 8-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1764810.1764814
Saxena, P., & Kaushik, M. (2013). Advantages and Limitations of Different SDLC Models.
International Journal For Technological Research In Engineering, 1(3), 117-121.
Retrieved from http://www.ijtre.com/manuscript/2013010301.pdf
8. THE WATERFALL, SPIRAL, AND PROTOTYPE SDLC MODELS 8
Shukla, A. K., & Saxena, A. (2013). Which Model is Best for the Software Project? “A
Comparative Analysis of Software Engineering Models.” International Journal of
Computer Applications, 76(11), 18-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5120/13290-0806