Skip to main content

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Agile is preferred over SDLC

Why always Agile is preferred over waterfall/SDLC

Updated
1 min read
Agile is preferred over SDLC
R

Can't leave learning.A very passionate Software Quality Assurance (SQA) Engineer about working with people. Painstaking with the software (SQA) is my most significant key to survival.

We all know about software development life cycle but there is always a common question that in most cases why we ignore SDLC and follow Agile. So it's a very simple question and it has a very simple answer. But before starting i want to clear a doubt you always have between SDLC and Waterfall.

SDLC is a structured approach to the software development and Waterfall is a SDLC model.Waterfall was the first SDLC model to be used widely in software development projects.That's why it is called pioneer of all SDLC process.

Now I guess you can feel those concepts very clearly. Let's jump into our main topic that is why Agile, why not SDLC?

Agile is famous for it's flexibility. It allows making any number of changes at any stage of the project. On the other hand ,SDLC offers a long term planning but agile offers short term planning.That's why Agile is more preferred over SDLC.

If you have any doubts and confusion about SDLC and STLC you can read my article here. SDLC vs STLC

Any kind of suggestions is highly appreciable. Keep learning.

W

It is an interesting read, yet you fail to explain why Agile would be better than the older Waterfall/SDLC techniques. In fact, when you do Agile development, you're basically having smaller waterfalls. I've had to learn the "Cap Gemini SDM" methodology when I was young, decades ago. This method explains how development goes through several different phases, starting from a new idea all the way until it's implemented. And while it predates Agile methodologies with about 3 decades, (Agile is from 2001, SDM is from 1970) it is not obsolete! In fact, if you use Agile properly then you can still find these phases, but they happen in much smaller pieces. Any project starts with a bunch of ideas, where you just determine the goal for any functionality. You need to collect information and decide what is and isn't important. This would be the first phase. But instead of having one big piece of information, you would divide it in dozens of smaller bits and thus turn it into Agile. The next step would be defining each piece of information. In Waterfall, you would have a lot of stuff that need to be defined at the same time. In Agile, you just define dozens of smaller pieces. This continues for all the other phases, all the way to the operation and support phase. In classic Waterfall, users end up with large updates once every X months or so. With Agile, updates could be once every two weeks or even faster, as a new update can be done whenever a new feature was added. So, Agile is not a single, huge waterfall. It's just dozens of much smaller waterfalls that all cascade down into the final product. It speeds up delivery of new features, but it's still not that different. Many compare Agile with Waterfall and think they're opposites. That's not really the case, although Waterfall focuses on the whole project and each phase applies to the whole project. With Agile, you have phases per feature instead. And you basically start with Scrum or Kanban to put some new idea or feature on the board. Then you work it out further, start coding and then testing before the feature can be published. So, Agile still has flows. They're just a lot smaller than with classic Waterfalls. :)

1
R

Thank you for your deep analysis. I just want to clarify that it is a very common FAQ in the interview for the Freshman/Internship position. That's why I tried to keep my answer as simple and easy as I can. You gave us detailed knowledge which is highly appreciated. I think this will help the experienced as well as entry professionals also. Thank you so much again for your contribution. Take love