This means you test your code manually ? I can't imagine not doing TDD, except during extremely early prototyping before knowing if a code will be useful at all.
TDD and unit tests aren't exactly the same thing. Also, not doing TDD doesn't mean that there's no automated testing. I prefer to write my code and then do a few end-to-end automated tests for the most important parts of the code to serve as a backup in case some change in the code causes massive failures. But TDD is overall tedious for (usually) little benefit when compared to a few well selected end-to-end tests. And unit testing is even less benefit for even more work, unless you are doing something very very specific.
Interesting, in my experience TDD is easy (it's just that a specific mental process needs to happen, besides learning a xUnit API or something, and also experience tells how to know which tests to write and which not to write, so that maintaining the tests doesn't become a burden) and always provides better ROI on the long run.
With end-to-end tests such as when piloting a browser, it's not really easy to get things like tracebacks into the console output for example.
Exactly, in the time it would take me to write a proper TDD suite, I've written a skeleton of a product from end to end and can start iterating over it.
If you're working on a very specific box that has well defined, well known inputs and outputs then TDD is an excellent tool.
But for anything with a non-specific "We'd like to do X and display the result on Y" it just gets in the way.
I'd TDD that "do X results in Y" and then add an end to end that that verifies that "Y is displayed", unless that code that displays Y is too trivial then an end to end test might not even be necessary.
Test-driven development is a useful tool, but it doesn't remove the need for manual testing completely, especially on frontend projects.
I've worked on mobile apps before with a small team, and inevitably, we'll find bugs that show up in the user interface when the user rotates their phone. It's hard to unit test for rotation changes, and it's also hard to code a rotation change into an end-to-end test on mobile. Animations are also something that's difficult to test in an automated fashion, and all the testing in the world won't be as good as showing the animation in front of a designer. So some level of manual testing is needed on mobile.
I've worked on web frontends where there would be bugs with scrolling jumping back and forth. An end-to-end test using Selenium may not catch the issue, but for a user, it can be painfully obvious. Similarly, animations are also hard to unit test on the web. So some level of manual testing is needed on the web.
The only place where I could see manual testing NOT being needed is for backend development, since the input and output to a backend system is much more controlled. You could write an end-to-end test for any scenario a user could throw at your system.
In summary, don't underestimate the value of manual QA!