apparently it has just been revealed that the government spent 11.8 million pounds on the app.
some people I know involved in software development for big companies say that seems like an awful lot for what it was/time spent developing it.
Printable View
apparently it has just been revealed that the government spent 11.8 million pounds on the app.
some people I know involved in software development for big companies say that seems like an awful lot for what it was/time spent developing it.
Yes, that is a big wad of cash. They obviously threw the kitchen sink at it because it was important for coming out of lockdown. Now it is shit, it isn't really that important after all. People will fall for the line they spin every single time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjk
I believe they were paying top whack money to get it down ASAP, which is understandableQuote:
Originally Posted by Rjk
it wasnt working, so they had 3 options
keep on developing it, spending more money and it still not working
release a app that didnt do the job ( putting us at risk )
write if off and look at something else ( the google / apple app )
with all of them options they were dammed with whatever they decided to do
Which begs the question of why didn't they go with what was already being used? I was critical at the time and it now appears that criticism was warranted.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
I heard they were beavering away. :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
I guess you haven't worked in software development :hehe:
At the time, I defended their actions. I was foolish, and wet behind the ears, and assumed they knew what they were doing. A lot of wealthy software developers walking around at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee
i'm guessing once a big organisation approaches a supplier that supplier has the upper hand in charging whatever if can , as they know the requirement critical and urgent , I'm sure the same happens with everything procured in this crises, very sad really providers will want to make a buck for government and NHS at such critical times with folk dying .Quote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
What difference does that make ?Quote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
indeedQuote:
Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee
the apple / google app made sense
Quite a big one.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
You are clearly guessing. A supplier has failed to deliver, and our Government has paid £11.8m for them to not deliver.Quote:
Originally Posted by life on mars
really ?Quote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
Yes. Do you know the going rate for developing an app that doesn't even work?Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
isnt that a bit of a " how long is a piece of string ", would depend on how many hours the developers had put into the project, were they paid extra due to a deadline and needing more people working around the clock on itQuote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
How many development hours does £11.8m buy you?Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
$200 a hourQuote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
add to that a massive uplift as it was rather urgent
OK mate, it's clear you are just making it up as you go along.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
I remember us debating it! :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
It seemed a strange thing to do, when there was already something that could have worked. I got the feeling at the time that the government were hell bent on trying to show they could be world leaders in something, possibly to get one over on a certain political and trade union, but let's not go there. Dare I say it, but every time I hear how we're going to be world beaters at something, I get a rather underwhelming feeling, a feeling that a cockup is imminent. If something works from elsewhere, use it.
I think the more pertinent questions are around the business and IT architecture around the "app". Did NHSX contract a single supplier to provide the end-to-end service with a single supplier responsible and accountable for delivery of the outcome? Or did it have a procurement strategy of contracting for "lots" where a few small to medium enterprises were contracted to provide different bits of the service and NHSX was the integrator and took on the risk for delivering the outcome rather than paying a premium to the prime contractor to deliver it on their behalf and setting that risk/reward into the contract. Until you know what £12m was supposed to deliver and who owned the risk I think we are all pissing in the wind.
There were a total of 15 contractors involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays
The issue is, the Apple/Google app doesn't work that well either. It cannot distinguish whether you have been 1m or 3m away from a covid infected person. In fairness to the Government, this is what they were aiming to achieve but their app works on 75% of android phones and a whopping 4% of Apple phones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee
It is incredible the rate at which the Government rush out to tell us good news is on the way, we have a game changer coming up. Only, to then go back and say "um, no, and it isn't that important anyway". I reckon Boris Johnson tells his wife/girlfriend/mistress (delete if appropriate, no? Ok then) their Christmas presents well in advance of the big day.
So who was the integrator and who took the risk, one of those contractors or NHSX? If it was the latter, and that would fit as the Government Digital Service mantra was big IT (think Accenture, IBM etc) bad......Small and Medium Enterprises using Agile development tools good. The problem being that government has not recreated quality in-house programme and integration management teams so instead of paying 25% mark up for an integrator to own some of the risk the government teams full of starry eyed idealists take on that role. if, as you say, there were 15 contractors involved then NHSX would own the integration of the APIs between the user interface and the back-end systems when all the 15 developers were blaming each other as none of them wants to end up with contractual liaibility!Quote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
It would be unlikely that a single contractor would take all the risk and I would suspect it would be down to NHSX. I've worked on projects with 2 contractors and the conference calls are painful when it comes to identifying which cog is not working. 15 contractors, well, it would be easy for a CGI (say) or Unisys type company to go missing with fingers pointing elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays
It begs the question of whether they looked at what was available, its flaws and how to improve them or whether it decided to go their own way entirely.Quote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
Agreed with your summing up about Government information! :hehe:
The detection distance ability is governed by the version of Bluetooth used in the phone. Only BT version 5.1 can detect <1m, other older versions 3m. I am guessing that the majority of i-phones have older BT version chips installed.Quote:
Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO
how many people could you employ for what must have been about 6 weeks at 200 pounds an hour?Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
must be getting on for 200 contractors to make 11.8 million.
and I've worked with.some pretty expensive software engineers in the past, none of which have come close to that amount.