<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xml:lang="en-US" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>studios.thoughtworks.com - Forest for the Trees Comments</title>
  <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008:/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees/comments</id>
  <generator uri="http://mephistoblog.com" version="0.7.3">Mephisto Noh-Varr</generator>
  <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees/comments.xml" rel="self" type="application/atom+xml"/>
  <link href="/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
  <updated>2008-04-09T08:47:14Z</updated>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Simon</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1016</id>
    <published>2008-04-04T11:23:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-04-04T11:23:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Simon</title>
<content type="html">I have been trying 2.0 EA at a client site (f500 regulated beast). I must say, it's an impressive release. I can go into the the +/- of each feature and how it compares to V1 and Rally, but that's not what's standing out in my mind. And forget about the elegance of the UI. I think Mingle sets a new standard in the area of human factors. What I have noticed since the 1st release is, these guys are churning out software FAST! If you have not seen 2.0, take a look at it. Email the Mingle guys and ask them for access. In my view, the have surpassed V1 and Rally. So, the question that I have put forward to my client is, for each of the vendors you are looking at, where will they be 6 months from today? My take is, Mingle will trounce the rest of the market for a few reasons: 1) they really seem to know how to build software that humans want to use. 2) they know how to build it fast. they seem to have a 75% speed advantage 3) they are not locking you in to a given approach. Mingle is something special in its ability to give you exactly what you need from a process and reporting perspective, but also be 100% process agnostic out of the box. 4) the people i spoke to there said they have over 100 million in sales, so they are not your typical start-up hoping to make it or get bought. Note, this 100M # includes the parent, who owns the software group. Anyway, it's good stuff. I would love to see what their dev team/approach/environment looks like. Probably can learn a lot from that as well. HEY MINGLERS, PUBLISH A WHITE PAPER ON THE BUILDING OF MINGLE!!!! P.S. I am not one of those ruby wild eyed kids...</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Eli Weir</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1015</id>
    <published>2008-03-28T10:53:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-03-28T10:53:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Eli Weir</title>
<content type="html">@Rusty - As somone who has used both Rally and V1, I can state that hosting your own installation of V1 gives you superfast performance. Using their hosted trial is not a good indication of the power or flexibility of the package. As to Mingle, I have watched the product evoloution with interest, and 2.0 has me itching for a trial.</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Rusty</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1014</id>
    <published>2008-03-21T01:37:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-03-21T01:37:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Rusty</title>
<content type="html">I have to throw a bg, 'huh?&quot; out with regards to performance. I am simultaneously evaluating mingle, rallyDev and versionOne. RallyDev performs quite well but V1 is not cutting the mustard. Both are hosted solutions. I would expect their hardware to outperform our small office setup. I have Mingle installed on an HP Athlon personal computer with 3G ram and its mighty fast. On that machine I only have cruisecontrol.net, subversion and mingle. My 2cent is that Mingle performs very well for what it does. Keep the change...</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Chris Sellers</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1013</id>
    <published>2008-03-20T10:49:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-03-20T10:49:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Chris Sellers</title>
<content type="html">Pretty please!!! Love, love, love the Mingle interface, but hate, hate, hate the performance :(</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Ben Scherrey</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1012</id>
    <published>2008-03-16T12:58:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-03-16T12:58:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Ben Scherrey</title>
<content type="html">We're very interested in trying out Mingle 2.0. We gave 1.0 and 1.1 a shot but they were resource pigs and not quite ready for prime time - at least not worth the price being asked. We hope 2.0's gonna break that issue for us... are we there yet? ...are we there yet? ...are we there yet? :)</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>markm</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1011</id>
    <published>2008-03-14T03:34:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-03-14T03:34:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by markm</title>
<content type="html">Any update on the 2.0 release? Card trees are pretty essential for Mingle to work well with Scrum.</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Clemens</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1010</id>
    <published>2008-03-08T06:50:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-03-08T06:50:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Clemens</title>
<content type="html">This looks great. Some old approaches (stepwise refinement, functional decomposition) seem renaissancing ;-) I manage projects, where packaged applications (standard ERP and other &quot;out-of-to-box&quot;-software) are introduced into business. And these packages are huge, not stories, not story trees, not epics, but sagas! Hierarchies are needed to breakdown these sagas into chewable chunks! I can hardly wait to see 2.0, pls keep me informed.</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Celso Pinto</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1009</id>
    <published>2008-02-28T04:42:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-02-28T04:42:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Celso Pinto</title>
<content type="html">Will it be possible for a card to have multiple parents? For example, can a task be related to multiple stories?</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Ketan Padegaonkar</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1008</id>
    <published>2008-02-27T03:07:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-02-27T03:07:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Ketan Padegaonkar</title>
<content type="html">The screenshots look amazing. When do mere mortals like us get to see this ?</content>  </entry>
  <entry xml:base="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/">
    <author>
      <name>Rik Meijer</name>
    </author>
    <id>tag:studios.thoughtworks.com,2008-02-19:1006:1007</id>
    <published>2008-02-25T11:38:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-02-25T11:38:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Blog"/>
    <link href="http://studios.thoughtworks.com/2008/2/19/forest-for-the-trees" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <title>Comment on 'Forest for the Trees' by Rik Meijer</title>
<content type="html">This is great ! We are currently evaluating your product for use at our academic institution and this really is the feature we currently miss (and better memory use...yes..) Keep up the good work ! Thanks, Rik Meijer - Student @ Avans Netherlands</content>  </entry>
</feed>
