89.99 In Stock
lfimplementing systematic reuse is risky, not doing it is even more risky. Trying systematic reuse unsuccessfully can cost precious time and resources and may make management sceptical of trying it again. But if your competitors do it successfully and you do not, you may lose market share and possibly an entire market. W. B. Frakes and S. Isoda, 1994 Software companies today are faced with new and more challenging market pressures. In response to this challenge, they have to reduce the time-to-market with new or enhanced products, increase the diversity of products available to the customers, and enhance the standardisation and interoperability of the products. At the same time, many companies carry the burden of large legacy systems, that have become too expensive to maintain and cannot sustain the demands of the marketing department for alterations, leading to business opportunities being lost [BEN95]. However the systems are very valuable and cannot be simply replaced because of the costs that such an operation entails. Simply replacing them may be too expensive because of the huge volumes of on-line data that must be converted, among other reasons.
Table of ContentsI Experiences.- 1 The SER Approach.- 2 Benefits of Software Evolution and Reuse.- 3 Lessons Learned.- 4 Conclusions and Recommendations.- II Application Experiment Reports.- 5 XiosBank.- 6 Stentofon.- 7 Garex.- 8 Bull.- 9 SIA.- 10 Instrumentation Laboratory.- 11 BPM.- 12 Pirelli.- 13 Ericsson Radar.- 14 Norsonic.- 15 Telecom Company.- 16 Telecom Gateway Framework.- Acronyms.- References.