[Jtsummers]

The original paper was very obviously not advocating for the initial process it describes. But it does describe Waterfall, and then it amends it into something that could actually work (specifically adding in feedback loops that Waterfall does not include).

Some fools in industry, DOD in particular, looked at the pretty picture and codified it as an option among several for defined development processes. Then contractors and gov't managers picked it because it was straightforward (on paper) to plan and schedule, and it made it into practice. It's still used by DOD contractors today and it still fails. It's not a bogeyman, but Royce himself is not to blame, he was pointing out the stupidity and illiterate fools missed the point.