MS Project Certification | All you need to know

• In this article you will learn:
• 1.Introduction.
• 2.Comparing Waterfall vs Devops.
• 3.Waterfall.
• 4.Advantages of Waterfall.
• 5.Cons of Waterfall.
• 6.DevOps.
• 7.Pros of DevOps.
• 8.Cons of DevOps.
• 9.Conclusion.

Introduction:

World is never be constant. With changing times, have refined and outdated some of best-proven methodologies across the globe. Now, more than ever is a requirement to be ahead of competition as a world has undergone a paradigm shift in its approach to the most of everything.With these evolving times, an organizations are compelled to reconsider their existing production methodologies. While each organization has its unique working approach, every single one is based on three of the most robust methodologies: But amid these fluctuating times where speed and perfection are be pertinent.

Comparing the Waterfall vs Devops:

Let’s dig into each of methodologies to help zero in on one of the approaches that suit, now and in a future:

Waterfall:

• Waterfall does sound are refreshing, doesn’t it? The mind’s eye envisions water gushing down from a precipice all the way to ground. The development methodology of a waterfall is also quite similar to it. It is the linear production model which allows developers to proceed only after the preceding phase is be complete.
• This methodology suits smaller scale projects which have simply definable deliverables. The project members would have to tick checkboxes of the methodology. The first milestone is that a team members need to thoroughly document requirements. Although every phase is equally important, this first phase explains the objectives of a project.
• Post-documentation, the members can start development, followed by an implementation of the developed deliverables. The testing team will step in here and detect areas for an improvement. Once bug fixing is done, the deliverable will be deployed. The deliverable will be maintained if needed.

Advantages of Waterfall:

• What is to be observed here is that a team members should complete each stage to proceed to next. As one team completes its contributions to a product, the other team shall pick off from where a former left off. This helps to next team to modify or rectify the project as there is partially existing framework.
• What lends waterfall edge over other two methodologies is that one doesn’t need any certification to participate in a waterfall production.
• Planning and creating an outline are enough for a team members to get ball rolling. And, unlike scrum, the work is not divvied into the multiple sprints where each of them has individual objective.
• In a waterfall method, the objectives are not deviated from as a team never loses sight of the end goals. In the manner of speaking, waterfall allows the production team to a work backward.
• However, documentation must be keep to ensure that everyone is in a loop given the amount of collaboration. This paves way for seamless transition whenever new team member takes on a work.

Cons of Waterfall:

• While all of this sounds be great, one should observe that waterfall is assembly line that produces software. Suppose something messy is detected in a testing phase.
• It will delay development and force the development team to explore a new ways that would be resource intensive as waterfall doesn’t allow much of any changes once stage is finished.
• This mortifying disadvantage also holds potentiality to render finished components useless. Should potentiality ever become a definitive, it would only result in a higher expenses.
• It is pertinent that the end goals must be explained initially as this allows planning of the stages. However, this makes a matters complex; if the client has a varying needs, the team members would have to revert to a square one. What’s more, is that testing is considerably delayed in this method as a components can’t be passed on to the following team members until all preceding steps are complete. This delays ultimate deployment and affects maintenance.
• If take an objective look, will understand that waterfall is best suited for the projects with little to no modifications when it comes to the end-goals.

DevOps:

• DevOps is a rage now. Unlike other two peers, DevOps is all about integrating together best ideas of the Agile process with the IT production teams. Prior to DevOps, the developers would work be independently of the other teams. With these gaps, rivalry sprouted between two teams, namely, development and operations teams.
• DevOps is the radical solution which combines both teams. This methodology bridged gap between the developers and operation members by increasing collaboration with the better communication. This unification allowed companies to deploy solutions faster and better.
• However, to err is human but in this world, erring is not option that many can afford. While Agile was all about flexibility which allowed the team members to rectify the mistakes, DevOps is about automation as it saves a time and effort. As DevOps is an offshoot of an Agile, there lies the maxim to finish the work in iterations.
• These incremental updates take pressure off the DevOps members as they are develop and deploy, after testing, components in a much more coordinated manner. This brings us to a unmissable aspect of DevOps, which is enhanced collaboration. With removal of barriers, there is undoubtedly higher collaboration which in turn leads to the robust products.

Pros of DevOps:

• It is a pretty obvious that DevOps encourages and perpetuates the swift rollout of products. As there is no sibling rivalry between two teams, there is little to no chance of faux pas induced by a miscommunications. Also, one can realize higher ROI as products are much better than those produced when development and operations teams are segregated. These great products lead to a better customer satisfaction as bug fixing and improvements are made promptly.
• What a favors DevOps even better is that it allows a product to be continuously improved. This aligns with Agile practices, which are continuous integration and deployment or CI/CD. perpetual improvements the bring DevOps to value engineering principles, which should be an approach to be adopted by the most.
• At the end of day, when one takes a step back and looks at DevOps, it is hard to ignore the methodolgy as it offers better benefits than a Agile and waterfall. If anything, waterfall pales compared to the DevOps as the former is all about working in stipulated, compartmentalized manner. While Agile has an edge over the waterfall with its flexibility, DevOps has a cohesiveness which propels productivity.

Cons of DevOps:

• The unification of a two groups is not something that happens overnight. One must train and establish the chain of command and work culture that binds a team members together. This requires the training them as the DevOps fusion is the gradual process. Also, if anyone from the parent organization or outsourcing partner had the traditional setup, there would be a clash of the cultures. The one with the traditional approach would have to remap organization to suit the DevOps.
• And regardless of however rosy DevOps may appear, ultimately, it is all about bringing an innovative people under one umbrella. This may lead to a clash of ideas and views, which would impede progress. This has to be avoided by an imbuing team spirit among all, and time should be given for them to grow.
• Lastly, aspects of a CI/CD are pretty innovative. However, company would have to rope in a software professionals who pack a punch when it comes to coding. This is essential as a company would essentially better software and having mediocre coders or testers around won’t cut it. And we all know how tough it is to find a right people for right job.

Conclusion:

There is no such thing as the compulsion or rule that dictates a company to restrict itself to one model. However, it is a pertinent that the production manager has a strong grip on knowledge and implementation processes. What’s more, is that methodologies are not some fluke successes that yielded results to practitioners.They have been followed for the ages, and the reason that they are continued to be discussed to this day shows that are relevant. Their existence is a good reason to develop the work culture that is compatible with these core methodologies. However, that is a task that is simpler said than done, and this is a primary motivator for most IT companies to the outsource their requirements to Veritis.