I noticed in recent NASCOE documents a brief discussion of "performance" problems, apparently due to MIDAS. Today I see ND FSA quoted in this article on problems with acreage reporting due to MIDAS performance problems.
I'm not a good person, so there's a smirk on my face, for which I apologize to everyone involved--I'm sure they are doing their best.
As some consolation I'd recall our problems with the ASCS-578 process when we first automated on the System-36. The initial program design had one entry screen for each parameter for a field or subdivision (i.e., "corn" would be on one screen, "grain" or "silage" would be on another). Do I need to add that with the first 36's we didn't move from one screen to the next very quickly? The net result was something which was unusable, though with the combination of ignorance and rigidity too often found in the South Building we (I) earnestly explained to the state specialists that counties had to use the software.
Here my memory fades--I think we officially used the initial design for 1985, backed off to a data load process for 1986, and perhaps came up with a revised process for 1987, though maybe it was 1988. The new process was an improvement, if I say so myself, but many counties still found it unusable for realtime applications.
Bottomline: progress is made slowly, often 2 steps forward and one back. And learn from mistakes, because as my example shows, they'll stick in your memory for the rest of your life.
No comments:
Post a Comment