>Mike,
>
>Delays also can come from project management success or failure.
>
>"Failure" in that the newcomers did not realize the full size of the job and ended up in a morass of incomplete spaghetti and branching solutions to the wrong problems. Or "Success" in that they knew their first task was to define the precise scope, resulting in a defining exercise that grew and grew until it took much of the 14 months. Since they shunned the old-timers, it sounds as if the former was more likely.
>
>Either way, hopefully these gurus learned that an "experienced" practitioner does not proclaim what something will cost or how long it will take until they know what it is. ;-) I don't think this is necessarily a story about NET unless you believe that this sort of over-confidence is more common in that camp.


All good points. We agree that it is oversimplifying to conclude, without knowing all the factors, that a particular experience makes one tool more productive than another.

I know some developers who could probably still be productive with assembler language and punch card decks. And others who would still be hacks no matter how many tools you gave them. A lot of the hard work is in thinking, i.e. when it looks like you're doing nothing ;-)