Software Quality Evaluation: User's View

Anas Bassam Al-Badareen, Mohd Hasan Selamat, Jamilah Din, Marzanah A. Jabar, Sherzod Turaev

2011 · 11 citations · 19 references

Concepts

Abstract

 Abstract: - Nowadays, software products rapidly increased and it is usage not limited to specific people or corporation. It is now used in the most of human life activities. Therefore, the quality of the software product is increasingly being important and the users demanding higher quality than ever before. However, most of this research is focused on the internal/development view of quality. Hence, in software development, strong attention must be given to the user's satisfaction. Recently, the studies intend to understand the users' perspective of the software quality. In this study, we intend to discuss the characteristics of the software products that influence the users' satisfaction on software quality. Based on the well-known software quality models and the emotion of the software users, a model of software quality evaluation based on users' views is proposed. one of these approaches is a user perceived quality. That it means a combination of product attributes which provide the greatest satisfaction to a specified user. According to Bevan (6), the expectation of software quality in both consumer and professional market is rapidly increased. That is, matching the software product with the real users needs is increasingly demanded. Moreover, he state that it is not enough sufficient to deliver a software product has a technical excellence. Also, it has to be easy to use and suitable for the end users in the work practices and activates, either the users are normal consumer or professionals. However, Chulani (2, 7) presented software product quality from customer's perspective, and the companies can increase the revenue by increase customer's satisfaction and improve the quality of the software product. That is in order to develop any software product, the user's requirements have to be addressed either functional and non-functional (quality of services) (8).

References

19