Myth 1: Testing is boring
A monotonous and boring thing, as a rumor about testing, frequently appears in mainstream media articles that compare testers to assembly-line workers in the software industry. And in fact, testing work presents us with new and exciting challenges every day.
Michael Bolton, Principal of DevelopSense and one of the authors of RapidSoftwareTesting, sums it up nicely in a great description:
"Testing is something we do with our motivation to seek out new information. Testing is a process of exploration, discovery, investigation, and learning. When we configure, operate, And when we look at a product, then we're testing. We're testing when we're trying to find the extent and limitations of the product and its design, and when we're driven by questions that haven't been answered or even asked. "
Myth 2: Testing is easy
Because users find bugs every day, it is often assumed that testing will not be difficult. In fact, testing is not as simple as finding bugs every day. It is just simpler and easier to get started with than some programming technologies such as Java and front-end. In fact, testing requires mastering some testing tools, simple development and programming techniques, and necessary theoretical knowledge for testing, etc. Only by mastering the technology can it be called software testing engineering, and the salary will naturally be relatively high.
Here's what Patrick Copeland from Google has to say about the qualities of a great tester:
"That's mindset and passion. From the 100 interviews I've done, 'excellence' can be distilled to:
1) a unique sensitivity to identify problems;
2) The passion for testing that accompanies this sensitivity.
In other words, they love testing and are good at it. They also understand that the challenges posed by testing are often equal to or greater than those posed by programming. A tester with the test genes and the right attitude will always find a job. They are gold. "
Myth 3: Testers only look for bugs
Yes, testers do look for bugs, but that's not their only purpose.
Here's a nice rundown of the rumor from Ankur from freesoftwaretesting.info:
"This view of the tester role is very narrow and does not benefit the customer. The tester is an expert on the system, application, or product under test. Unlike the developer responsible for a specific function or module, the tester understands how the whole system works. Work to meet customer goals. Testers know the added value of the product, the impact of the environment on productivity, and the best way to get the most out of the product.”
Myth 4: Machines will eliminate human testers
With advances in automation technology, it is often argued that one day computers will eliminate human testers. However, since the end user of an application is neither a robot nor a machine, but a human being, it stands to reason that human testing will always play an important role.
Here's what testing writer James Whittaker has to say about the importance of human testing:
"Test automation is often used to solve huge problems. The sheer scope makes automation fragile and unreliable because there is so much to do. There are certain things automation is good at and certain things people are better at, so it seems like a combination Either approach is probably better. What I want is automation to make my job, as a human, easier. Automation is better at analyzing data and noticing patterns. It's not very good at identifying correlations and judgment calls. Fortunately Humans are good at judgment."
Myth 5: Testers don't get along with developers
It's not hard to see why this rumor spread.
Testing authority James Bach once wrote:
"Anyone who does some work and turns it in to be judged is going to feel judged. It's not a pleasant feeling. And the problem is going to be understated by those who make light claims of this or that nat. Both refer to the information unit "Nate") being a "faulty" tester complicating it as if anything they personally dislike is a quality issue for everyone."
What is actually not known to most is that many testers were once developers (and vice versa), so there is a mutual understanding and understanding of the challenges facing each camp. Not all companies are like this, but in my experience, it would be wrong to say that most testers and developers don't get along.
In the enrollment of the May class of Xiaoqiang performance test, many small partners have already signed up. All students enjoy free, unlimited learning opportunities at no additional cost Interested private chat QQ: 2083503238, 1684129674, 480934277 (please do not repeat the consultation) Please read the outline first: www.xqtesting.com/blog/performance-testing-19.html
