[yetihehe]

I think software is one of those VERY rare things, where inaccurate estimates can actually be inaccurate by "orders of magnitude". After 20 years in the field, I still managed to use 2 months of time on a task that I estimated as 10 days.

[camel_gopher]

A rule that has suited me well is to take an estimate, double it, and increase by an order of magnitude for inexperienced developers. So a task the say would take two weeks ends up being 4 months. For experienced developers, halve the estimate and increase by an order of magnitude. So your 10 days estimate would be 5 weeks.

[QuercusMax]

The biggest estimation effort I ever took part in was a whole-system rewrite[1] where we had a very detailed functional test plan describing everything the system should do. The other lead and I went down the list, estimated how long everything would take to re-implement, and came up with an estimate of 2 people, 9 months.

We knew that couldn't possibly be right, so we doubled the estimate and tripled the team, and ended up with 6 people for 18 months - which ended up being almost exactly right.

[1]: We were moving from a dead/dying framework and language onto a modern language and well-supported platform; I think we started out with about 1MLOC on the old system and ended up with about 700K on the rewrite.

[yetihehe]

10 days was already after I used this algorithm. Previous several tasks on that codebase were estimated pretty good. Problem with this is that some tasks can indeed take SEVERAL orders of magnitude more time that you thought.

One of the hardest problems with estimating for me is that I mostly do really new tasks that either no one wants to do because they are arduous, or no one knows how to do yet. Then I go and do them anyway. Sometimes on time, mostly not. But everybody working with me already knows, that it may be long, but I will achieve the result. And in rare instances other developers ask me how did I managed to find the bug so fast. This time I was doing something I have never before done in my life and I missed some code dependencies that needed changing when I was revieving how to do that task.

[bdangubic]

I’ll send my friend that has a construction company to build your next 3500 sq ft house for $13.6 million dollars :)

[bumby]

Something often overlooked in cost/schedule estimates is the nature of joint probability of actions slipping. Action A slips and causes action B to slip. I think software is tougher to estimate because the number of interfaces is often much higher, and sometimes more hidden, than in hardware.

[bdangubic]

as opposed to say building a house where framing can totally slip while we run electricity and build a roof floating in mid-air

software is only tougher to estimate if incompetent people (vast majority of the industry, like 4+ million) is doing the estimating :)

[yetihehe]

My home construction slipped 6 months on 2 year build time. It happens in construction very often.

> software is only tougher to estimate if incompetent people (vast majority of the industry, like 4+ million) is doing the estimating :)

No, it is tough to estimate, but not only for incompetent people. And "incompetent" can be stretched to "don't know what he's doing", which is how I operate most of the time. I don't know what really needs to be done until it's done. Main part of my work is research on what actually needs to be done, then "just" implementing it. If I waited with estimating until I know what needs to be done, I would spend 3/4 time estimating and then 1/4 with clear understanding and good schedules (example description: I will be clicking keys for 5 hours).

[rkomorn]

> My home construction slipped 6 months on 2 year build time. It happens in construction very often.

Tangent, but I have at least 3 friends that would've (in retrospect) been nothing short of ecstatic if their home construction had "only" slipped 6 months on a 2 year timeline.

[bumby]

That’s a bit of a strawman considering I was deliberate in saying hardware interfaces are limited and not saying they are zero. The number of interfaces in software is often going to be orders of magnitude greater. The network effects and failure modes will often increase geometrically with the number of interfaces. In fact, big construction design firms have tools to easily identify and mitigate the “clashes” you bring up and those tools tend to work well because there is a finite number and the designs are well-documented (as opposed to software where changes are relatively cheap and easy so they often occur without documentation)

Saying incompetence is the reason is a trivial rebuttal that ignores the central claim about complexity. It’s like saying “the reason why we don’t have a theory of everything is because we don’t have competent physicists”

[Scarblac]

That's a factor four or five ir so, so still less than an order of magnitude.