The implication is that the preferred solution is to discard the software completely, and start again with a new system. This may not be appropriate in all cases, for example:
1. The software represents years of accumulated experience, which is not represented elsewhere, so discarding the software will also discard this knowledge, however inconveniently it is represented.
2. The manual system that was replaced by the software no longer exists, so system analysis must be undertaken on the software itself.
3. The software may actually work well, and its behavior may be well understood. A new replacement system may perform much more badly, at least in the early days. Hence it may be worth recovering some of the good features of the legacy system.
4. A typical large legacy software system has many users, who typically have exploited undocumented "features" and side effects in the software. It may not be acceptable to demand that users undertake a substantial rewrite for no discernable benefit. Therefore, it may be important to retain the interfaces and exact functionality of the legacy code, both explicit and implicit.
5. Users may prefer an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary approach.
Go To Page: 1
