Comparison Of Software Development Models: Spiral, Agile, And RAD

Spiral Model

Discuss about the Genetic Algorithm : Prioritization of Dcenarios.

Spiral Model: This particular model is mainly considered to be perfect combination of both iterative and waterfall model. It is inclusive of both controlled processing and systematic progress of waterfall model in the iterative model (Sharma, Sabharwal and Sibal, 2014). This particular process comes up with four kinds of phases. The four phases consist of stages like identification, design, construction, evaluation and lastly proper analysis of risk. Identification stage mainly initiate by proper collection of various requirements of business. The design mainly deals with designing the various phase of the system. The design of software is mainly inclusive of following things like logical, architectural and physical design. The actual software is mainly developed in construct phase. Developed software is mainly created by taking into consideration the requirements and design (Kazim, 2017). Analysis of risk is all about identification, monitoring, analysis and estimation of various kinds of risk in the given project.

Benefits: There are large number of benefits of this model like:

• Changing of requirement is mainly supported by this particular model.
• Making use of prototypes is considered to be very positive thing about this model. This particular model is considered to be useful in development of huge quantity of prototypes.
• Process or method of requirement analysis is mainly done accurately and very finely.
• Application of user can be easily seen in the earlier stage.

Drawbacks: There are several kinds of drawbacks of this Model like:

• Managing of the given task is considered to be very complex in nature.
• In some of the cases it can be easily encountered that project manager may fail to understand the fact that the whole project has ended.
• Number of spirals which are used in the project may fail to easily handle by the project manager as the given quantity have increased over the period of time.
• This particular model is not considering to be suitable for low risk kind of projects.

Agile Model: It is considered to be as one of the popular model of SDLC as it allows various project manager to handle projects in different ways. In agile Model, various kinds of modification can be done about the current phase so this model can easily work with the given requirement. Various kinds of activities in agile model are mainly put within the given time frame so that this particular model can easily work at each and every stage of the given project (Fuggetta and Di Nitto, 2014). Agile model comes up iterative approach which is used for delivering application unit at each and every unit after the completion of given project at the end of each and every iteration. Each unit of software is considered to be modified version of previous model. The feedback of the various users comes up with great impact on the given model. This model is considered to be adaptive in nature of SDLC in comparing to waterfall model which is considered to be predictive in nature.

Benefits: Agile model comes up with large number of benefits like:

• This model is considered to be very realistic kind of approach
• This method mainly provides support for cross training along with team work.
• Providing partial solution at beginning is considered to be crucial benefit
• This particular kind of model does not require any kind of extensive planning
• This model generally requires or needs minimum amount of sources.
• Development of functionality is mainly done on quickly basis.
• It is very easy to manage the projects
• This particular model is generally considered to be flexible for large number of developers

Disadvantages: There are many drawbacks of this model like:

• This particular model does not provide support for complex query management.
• The potentiality of taking of risk which is associated with sustainability, maintenance and extensibility is mainly considered to be of much higher value.

RAD Model: RAD stands for rapid action development which is totally based on various kinds of ideas or logic related to iteration and prototyping. This model does not require any kind of specific planning (Alshamrani and Bahattab, 2015). This particular model focus on the fact that existing kind of prototypes allow better kind of gathering of requirements of various customers. By the help of testing of various kinds of prototypes, the project manager can easily have some better idea regarding the progress of given projects. A prototype can be easily stated as a working model which is considered to be practically to any part of any given item. In RAD model, various kinds of utilitarian modules are made as prototypes are mainly incorporated for making the whole thing conveyance. As there no kind of gritty preplanning so it makes the whole much simpler for fusing the given progressions which mainly works under the advancement procedure. RAD venture is mainly considered to be iterative and kinds of iterative model. It can be having little groups which involves designers, space specialist, agents for client and other kind of IT assets working in the logical on the part or even prototype. The most important part is this particular model is to mainly ensure the fact that this model is fruitful so ensuring the fact that the prototypes are created for reusability.

Benefits and Drawbacks of Spiral Model

Advantages: There are large number of advantages of making use of this RAD model like

• Progress of the given report can be easily measureable in nature
• Time for development is considered to be much lesser in comparison to other kinds of models.
• This particular model is mainly concentrated on the feedback of large number of users.

Drawbacks:

• The dependency on this particular kind of modelling can easily make the whole project more vulnerable.
• Management of project is considered to be very complex in nature.

According to the given case study, it is much suitable for stating the model which is considered to be less complex for management and benefit of scope for creep handling which is the best kind of option available. For the development of software for AFD, the best kind of software provided is Agile. This particular model will allow project for development of team which can be used for developing system as per the requirement of users.

The ultimate goal of the memorandum is to easily provide a basic kind of idea regarding the implementation of User Centred Design and HCI (Human Computer Interaction) which can be easily used for the purpose proposed application of CRM application in an organization. User centred Design is mainly concentrated on the various users of the system. The design is not for usability of any kind of application. The designer can easily understand the basic idea regarding the usage of system. They have come up with specific kind of user requirement and design solution which is mainly analyzing against the requirements for various kinds of identification.

HCI that is Human computer interaction is all about studying the various identity of interaction of users with any kind of system. HCI mainly allows various kinds of designers to specify how various kinds of users can access the function of the system. They come up with various kinds of principles based on Human computer design.

UCD principles are mainly applied for proposing of CRM which is taken to be some kind of basic thought for being powerful. AFD CRM is designed in such a way that various kinds of users of the given system and kinds of task they will perform. Consistency in the given task process and behavior of system will make a great kind of advantage.

Plan for UCD based HCI for various application of CRM is manly done during the presence of project manager. In the beginning phase the project manager and various kinds of analyst will have to identify various kinds of requirements related to business and system.

Event	Event Type	Trigger	Source	Activity/Use Case	System Response/ Output	Destination
Women cloth selling	External	Speed up sales	Representative at sales department	Selling of various cloths	Quantity for placing order	Shops
Dress for selling	External	Speed up sales	Various representative at wedding	Selling of various wedding dress	Quantity for placing order	Individual Customer
Bill Payment	External	Payment	Client or customer	Making Payment	Bill	Representative
Creation of invoice	Creation of large number of invoice	Details for sales	Representative	Generation of Invoice	Bill	Client or customer
Providing discount	Minimizing the number of orders	Reduction of cost	Representative in sales	Giving Discount	Reducing the order cost	Client or customer
Order receive from client	Potential sales of product	Increase in sales	Client	Takes Order	Increasing sales	Representative

Name	Takes Order
Version	Representative-03
Goal	The ultimate goal of this use case diagram is to easily receive orders from various clients. The orders are mainly taken from individual clients or retail clients.
Summary	Representative may easily contact various kinds of clients like retail and individual customers which helps in having a proper understanding regarding the AFD products.
Actors	Representatives
Pre-Conditions	The order giver must be under a sales zone
Triggers	Increase in sales
Basic Course of Events	Various kinds of sales representative can easily contact various customers Customers can easily have idea regarding the products catalogue Customer can easily give order to the various kinds of representative. Representative can easily give order for request to head office.
Alternative Paths	Big customers can send a letter of quote to the head office directly for purchasing the products
Post Conditions	The client must pay all the dues
Business Rules	The representative must sanction the order before commenting to the client The representative must provide the invoice to the client
Notes	The representative must be available during product delivery

Alshamrani, A. and Bahattab, A., 2015. A comparison between three SDLC models waterfall model, spiral model, and Incremental/Iterative model. International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI), 12(1), p.106.

Chilana, P.K., Ko, A.J. and Wobbrock, J., 2015. From user-centered to adoption-centered design: A case study of an HCI research innovation becoming a product. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1749-1758). ACM.

Fernández-Sáez, A.M., Genero, M., Chaudron, M.R., Caivano, D. and Ramos, I., 2015. Are Forward Designed or Reverse-Engineered UML diagrams more helpful for code maintenance?: A family of experiments. Information and Software Technology, 57, pp.644-663.

Fuggetta, A. and Di Nitto, E., 2014. Software process. In Proceedings of the on Future of Software Engineering (pp. 1-12). ACM.

Kay, M., Nelson, G.L. and Hekler, E.B., 2016. Researcher-centered design of statistics: Why Bayesian statistics better fit the culture and incentives of HCI. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 4521-4532). ACM.

Kazim, A., 2017. A Study of Software Development Life Cycle Process Models. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, 8(1).

Kumar, G. and Bhatia, P.K., 2014. Comparative analysis of software engineering models from traditional to modern methodologies. In Advanced Computing & Communication Technologies (ACCT), 2014 Fourth International Conference on (pp. 189-196). IEEE.

Nanthaamornphong, A., Carver, J., Morris, K. and Filippone, S., 2015. Extracting uml class diagrams from object-oriented fortran: Foruml. Scientific Programming, 2015, p.1.

Rani, S.B.A.S.U., 2017. A detailed study of Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) Models. International Journal Of Engineering And Computer Science, 6(7).

Sarker, I.H., Faruque, F., Hossen, U. and Rahman, A., 2015. A Survey of Software Development Process Models in Software Engineering. International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications, 9(11), pp.55-70.

Sharma, C., Sabharwal, S. and Sibal, R., 2014. Applying genetic algorithm for prioritization of test case scenarios derived from UML diagrams. arXiv preprint arXiv:1410.4838.

Störrle, H., 2018. On the impact of size to the understanding of UML diagrams. Software & Systems Modeling, 17(1), pp.115-134.