So at my new company I'm back to software testing. What goes around comes around I suppose - I first learned the ins and outs of software testing at HP about 15 years ago. Even though most of my jobs have been hardware testing since then, I still enjoy reading about it (i.e. - here, there, and way back then). As my dad has said many times, it never hurts to learn something new.
Speaking of which, I recently found two articles about the costs of NOT testing your software that I enjoyed, in a perverse sort of way. The first article is a bit esoteric unless you've done serious code testing before. Basically, it explains how Kaspersky released an update to software that wasn't regression-tested. In other words they made changes to the software, and, while they may have tested their changes, they didn't test whether those changes would mess up the base code. That's the whole point of a regression test suite.
The second article is of somewhat more personal importance. For a long time I owned only Toyota cars. But once I started reading about braking problems back in 2009, I decided to buy Ford instead (here and here). This past October a court finally ruled against Toyota, and central to the case was the Engine Control Module's firmware.
Will companies forever keep neglecting software testing in favor of releasing product ASAP? I mean, just reading a paper like this from NASA and anyone with half a brain should realize that software testing is of paramount importance. Jeez.