Link Details

I particularly agree with the notion of not outsourcing the core development. We outsource larger projects to North American companies, but I still think the Architecture of the overall project, database design and test plan need to be developed in house. If you cannot afford quality high level Architects, DB developers, etc then you should be developing projects large enough to warrant outside help. You'll only get burned in the long run.

Electronics is a key example. Most large electronics manufacturers design the device in house, but outsource the manufacturing. Software should be the same way. We develop the design outsource the grunt code, but make sure you have good test plans to ensure that you receive a quality product.

What's with the comments? Hilarious.

Isn't manufacturing a bad analogy since it's mostly automated? Construction is slightly better since the work has elements which are necessarily manual, except that in the world of software a single construction worker could potentially create a "building maker" tool rendering other construction workers useless. Likewise, the company that makes the hammer might also upgrade their toolset to make a "city block" maker. Another reason construction is a better metaphor is that the bulk of the work in a software product is the creation and maintenance of a single entity while in manufacturing its about mass production of the designed element.

In reality how can either electronics or construction really compare to software development?

i'm a contrator outside U.S. working with US companies. well, i'm a good one. thats why i work alone.
but i agree. most of the local outsourcing software development companies here suck. their 'developers' are daytime coders. and well, they have almost the same problems author describes.