Testing jobs

[Casawi]

I have been assigned to do testing for a couple of weeks now, and realized how shitty it is. I now know I would never get a job that has the word testing in its description..lol

I think it is just me, you guys have jobs where you enjoy testing, or testing is the best part ?

I would think any job with testing that involves smashing things would be cool I guess, not sure about the rest.

 

[Mackie2k]

Testing Rules!!!

I've been testing for almost 10 years now, it's all about the product you work on.

If you hate the product, you'll hate your job.

I work on really cool products, so it makes everything alot better.

 

[Queasy]

I've done testing for the past five years after being laid-off at my first job where I did some testing but was mostly a BA/Programmer/Support hybrid (weird situation).

I've since moved up to a Business Analyst as of a few weeks ago.

As Mackie mentions, the product you work on makes the difference. Also, the processes in place make a huge difference. Sloppy processes will result in making testing a giant PITA.

Testing has many advantages though. One of them being it is a great way to get your foot in the door and get pretty in-depth knowledge of the product. The biggest disadvantage though is that you are at the end of the development life cycle and are almost always under a huge time crunch.

 

[Casawi]

Originally posted by: Mackie2k
Testing Rules!!!

I've been testing for almost 10 years now, it's all about the product you work on.

If you hate the product, you'll hate your job.

I work on really cool products, so it makes everything alot better.

I love the product but testing it is a bitch. Well maybe part of it has to do with me writing code ... haha

 

[Aikouka]

What kind of testing are you talking about though? I mean there's white box, gray box and black box testing and frankly, I much more prefer white box testing (although that's more of a software developer's job) as I can look at code for hours without getting bored, but if you sit me down to write "directions" on how to test a feature using the end product, I'll get quite bored. Even if the product is interesting, I find doing such things to be mindless where I enjoy code, because I get to whip out my pencil and paper and write stuff down and figure it out.

 

[LS20]

the only fun thing about testing is when i get to go to europe and test and have everything paid for
but testing itself gets repetitive

 

[Casawi]

Originally posted by: LS20
the only fun thing about testing is when i get to go to europe and test and have everything paid for
but testing itself gets repetitive

Nice deal! but yeah the repetitiveness is what kills me. I can't seem to get my mind in a testing mode, since I worked on putting the whole product together, it is harder and I tend to overlook things. I think I would do better job testing something I didn't do.

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: Casawi
Nice deal! but yeah the repetitiveness is what kills me. I can't seem to get my mind in a testing mode, since I worked on putting the whole product together, it is harder and I tend to overlook things. I think I would do better job testing something I didn't do.

A developer should never perform the official test on their own work. Preliminary testing is of course warranted (things like string testing, etc).

 

[MrDudeMan]

I am getting ready to transition into the testing phase and it will be very cool. I can't say a lot about it obviously but it's the next Itanium2. Things are about to get crazy around here but it should be a great time.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: Casawi
Nice deal! but yeah the repetitiveness is what kills me. I can't seem to get my mind in a testing mode, since I worked on putting the whole product together, it is harder and I tend to overlook things. I think I would do better job testing something I didn't do.

A developer should never perform the official test on their own work. Preliminary testing is of course warranted (things like string testing, etc).

Absolutely. Testing your own work is a big no-no for a variety of reasons.

How my office works from coding on:
- Dev codes and performs unit test.
- Another Dev peers the work.
- Code is added to a build that is released to the QA group.
- QA tests the change and other parts of the system that the change potentially impacts.
- Errors reported and fixed. Repeat previous steps.
- Build is certified and released to client(s).

 

[James Bond]

Testing gets old fast. My last job was QA and I couldn't stand it after a while.

 

[azazyel]

I've been testing for over two years now but I don't actually work on products though. Mainly I do system modifications and enhancements. The company I work for is very strict in following the SDLC and it's the writing of the Approach, the Plan and then the Test Conditions. I swear it takes me twice as long to do the paper work as it does the testing. But it does save a bunch of time when I have to retest another system because I'll already have the majority of the stuff already written out.

 

[Casawi]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: Casawi
Nice deal! but yeah the repetitiveness is what kills me. I can't seem to get my mind in a testing mode, since I worked on putting the whole product together, it is harder and I tend to overlook things. I think I would do better job testing something I didn't do.

A developer should never perform the official test on their own work. Preliminary testing is of course warranted (things like string testing, etc).

Absolutely. Testing your own work is a big no-no for a variety of reasons.

How my office works from coding on:
- Dev codes and performs unit test.
- Another Dev peers the work.
- Code is added to a build that is released to the QA group.
- QA tests the change and other parts of the system that the change potentially impacts.
- Errors reported and fixed. Repeat previous steps.
- Build is certified and released to client(s).

We are much smaller company. So for example we have a guy that works in the lab with processing wafers and he also writes Java code ... lol
Everybody does everything around here except the VP, he is in charge of dealing with customers (future customers), and press releases etc...

 

[Alistar7]

I have held testing positions that involed both non-destructive and destructive fields. I was fortunate to work on projects that included the Raptor F-22 and various other military, nuclear, and aerospace endeavors. I even got the chance to work with the Cleveland Museum of Art. Obviously this type of testing is far different than code work, which would drive anyone to an early death caused by boredom lol....

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Casawi

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: Casawi
Nice deal! but yeah the repetitiveness is what kills me. I can't seem to get my mind in a testing mode, since I worked on putting the whole product together, it is harder and I tend to overlook things. I think I would do better job testing something I didn't do.

A developer should never perform the official test on their own work. Preliminary testing is of course warranted (things like string testing, etc).

Absolutely. Testing your own work is a big no-no for a variety of reasons.

How my office works from coding on:
- Dev codes and performs unit test.
- Another Dev peers the work.
- Code is added to a build that is released to the QA group.
- QA tests the change and other parts of the system that the change potentially impacts.
- Errors reported and fixed. Repeat previous steps.
- Build is certified and released to client(s).

We are much smaller company. So for example we have a guy that works in the lab with processing wafers and he also writes Java code ... lol
Everybody does everything around here except the VP, he is in charge of dealing with customers (future customers), and press releases etc...

Well, we were a much smaller company when I started than we are now. I came in at the start of a big growth boom and it has continued to the point where we've run out of space.

It would still be a good idea to have someone else test your code though. It will result in a better end product. At my first company they stupidly got rid of the testing group but everyone's code was still tested by someone else.

 

[Casawi]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Casawi

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: Casawi
Nice deal! but yeah the repetitiveness is what kills me. I can't seem to get my mind in a testing mode, since I worked on putting the whole product together, it is harder and I tend to overlook things. I think I would do better job testing something I didn't do.

A developer should never perform the official test on their own work. Preliminary testing is of course warranted (things like string testing, etc).

Absolutely. Testing your own work is a big no-no for a variety of reasons.

How my office works from coding on:
- Dev codes and performs unit test.
- Another Dev peers the work.
- Code is added to a build that is released to the QA group.
- QA tests the change and other parts of the system that the change potentially impacts.
- Errors reported and fixed. Repeat previous steps.
- Build is certified and released to client(s).

We are much smaller company. So for example we have a guy that works in the lab with processing wafers and he also writes Java code ... lol
Everybody does everything around here except the VP, he is in charge of dealing with customers (future customers), and press releases etc...

Well, we were a much smaller company when I started than we are now. I came in at the start of a big growth boom and it has continued to the point where we've run out of space.

It would still be a good idea to have someone else test your code though. It will result in a better end product. At my first company they stupidly got rid of the testing group but everyone's code was still tested by someone else.

I am not testing my own code, I am writing code to test hardware and firmware that I worked on.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Casawi

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Casawi

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: Casawi
Nice deal! but yeah the repetitiveness is what kills me. I can't seem to get my mind in a testing mode, since I worked on putting the whole product together, it is harder and I tend to overlook things. I think I would do better job testing something I didn't do.

A developer should never perform the official test on their own work. Preliminary testing is of course warranted (things like string testing, etc).

Absolutely. Testing your own work is a big no-no for a variety of reasons.

How my office works from coding on:
- Dev codes and performs unit test.
- Another Dev peers the work.
- Code is added to a build that is released to the QA group.
- QA tests the change and other parts of the system that the change potentially impacts.
- Errors reported and fixed. Repeat previous steps.
- Build is certified and released to client(s).

We are much smaller company. So for example we have a guy that works in the lab with processing wafers and he also writes Java code ... lol
Everybody does everything around here except the VP, he is in charge of dealing with customers (future customers), and press releases etc...

Well, we were a much smaller company when I started than we are now. I came in at the start of a big growth boom and it has continued to the point where we've run out of space.

It would still be a good idea to have someone else test your code though. It will result in a better end product. At my first company they stupidly got rid of the testing group but everyone's code was still tested by someone else.

I am not testing my own code, I am writing code to test hardware and firmware that I worked on.

Ahh ok. Well, the same concept still applies.

 

[Casawi]

Ahh ok. Well, the same concept still applies. [/quote]

And testing still blows for me...lol. I am sitting here trying to come up with scenarios to code up and I got ZERO so far except basic functions.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Casawi
And testing still blows for me...lol. I am sitting here trying to come up with scenarios to code up and I got ZERO so far except basic functions.

Well, that's usually the way to begin. Start with the basic functions and expand from there into other likely user scenarios. Then you expand further from there into the seemingly ridiculous scenarios.

That is the hardest part. Putting yourself in the role of the user. Which, again, is why you generally don't want to test your own work beyond simple unit testing. You're already locked into the mindset from the development standpoint which makes it harder to switch to the user standpoint.

 

[Alistar7]

At least if your testing fails to catch something at worst case a program crashes, we don't have that luxury with an F-22, nuclear reactor component, booster engine, etc lol...

 

[miniMUNCH]

I can't believe there are folks who like testing...It must be a personality thing.

If someone wanted to torture me all they have to do is force me to do code tests or product testing. I'd crack in about 2 hours for sure.

 

[dighn]

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
I can't believe there are folks who like testing...It must be a personality thing.

If someone wanted to torture me all they have to do is force me to do code tests or product testing. I'd crack in about 2 hours for sure.

Seriously... in my current job I have to do a lot of testing, for both my own stuff and for others because I'm the 2nd most junior guy in the group. The stuff I test is pretty varied, both software and hardware but it still sucks at times. I can't believe you guys enjoy testing.

 

[Casawi]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Casawi
And testing still blows for me...lol. I am sitting here trying to come up with scenarios to code up and I got ZERO so far except basic functions.

Well, that's usually the way to begin. Start with the basic functions and expand from there into other likely user scenarios. Then you expand further from there into the seemingly ridiculous scenarios.

That is the hardest part. Putting yourself in the role of the user. Which, again, is why you generally don't want to test your own work beyond simple unit testing. You're already locked into the mindset from the development standpoint which makes it harder to switch to the user standpoint.

Yeah, I hope it comes together. I have to come up with a module to be implemented by the end of the week. I am thinking about working on this from home, it might help me get into a user mode.

 

[Koing]

I bailed out of testing and got a more interesting job. I was testinga product and the system not really the code. Just the end products hat users get to use and not the code by writing other code...

Koing

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
I can't believe there are folks who like testing...It must be a personality thing.

If someone wanted to torture me all they have to do is force me to do code tests or product testing. I'd crack in about 2 hours for sure.

Depends of what you are testing, and the method of testing. Trust me, there are many that you would find fascinating. I have done digital radiography scans of some of the masters paintings (picasso, van gogh, rembrandt) among other extremely rare and valuable museum pieces. Items that are not even displayed, the rest of the world will probably never see them and even if so certainly not as intimately. Some recently discovered items I was one of the first few people to actually get to see them. Helping to conclusively determine their validity, condition, and value was rather exciting.

I will have to look for a pic I saved years ago, If I can find it I will upload and post. X-ray taken of a bust depicting a 14th century saint, film was scanned and transferred into a digital image file. There was an "urban legend" associated with the statue of an actual piece of the saints bone being cast inside. The bust was made well after his death, supposedly the artist covertly dug up the saint and retrieved a section of bone, then refilled the grave. I found it, a section of a lower arm bone cast into the upper arm area of the statue. No way to conclusively prove if the bone inside the statue was actually from that saint without damaging the artwork and exhuming the body, but there is no doubt there is a piece of human bone inside.

I have done testing on some "items" for the military that I can't even discuss, but I sincerely doubt you would find them "boring".