I’m partnering with SmartBear on a sponsored series of content about tools for the AI era. As always, all opinions are entirely my own. The last time I wrote about this I had pointed BearQ at my live website, let it build a bunch of tests on the course catalogue page, and showed you what […]
I redesigned my site and broke my own tests Read More »
I’m partnering with SmartBear on a sponsored series of content about tools for the AI era. As always, all opinions are entirely my own. I have a long-standing suspicion of tools that promise to find problems for me, and it comes from watching what happens to them about three months into the journey. Somebody switches
My website, as seen by BearQ Read More »
I have just come back from presenting at CAST 2026 in Cocoa Beach, and something that’s been bugging me for a while finally clicked. Somewhere in every testing event I have been to in the last fifteen years, someone makes the case that testers are undervalued, and the case is usually made well. I saw
Singing in the Dark Read More »
I’m partnering with SmartBear on a sponsored series of content about tools for the AI era. As always, all opinions are entirely my own. A while ago I watched a mobile app go from a sales prop to a production system in the space of a single meeting. It had been built as a demo,
When Testing Costs an Hour, Not Days Read More »
Earlier this week I left a comment on a LinkedIn post about testing in an AI-assisted workflow. The post itself was fine, better than most. It argued that when the same AI writes both the function and the test, the two share the same blind spots, so you should write the test first and decide
Should the tester role even exist? Read More »
I’m partnering with SmartBear on a sponsored series of content about tools for the AI era. As always, all opinions are entirely my own. SmartBear ran a survey in January 2026 of 273 software testing and quality decision-makers, mostly directors and above, and the writeup, their AI Software Quality Gap Report, lets the numbers speak
Fighting AI with AI is the easy part Read More »
Session two closed with a question I couldn’t answer.1 When a product scores 78% on a given metric, what tells you whether that’s good enough to ship? I flagged it as something session three would probably address, and it did, though not in the way I expected. The question can’t be meaningfully answered until you’ve
The anatomy of a metric Read More »
Session one left me with two things I hadn’t resolved.1 The first was a line the instructor said almost in passing: “the hard part is scalability, not automation.” I wrote it down because it piqued something, but I couldn’t quite work out what problem it was pointing at. The second was a question I kept
The AI evals field chose a flawed tool and stuck with it Read More »
If you’ve been following me on Linkedin, or indeed have been reading my blog for a while, you’ll know that I’m interested in AI applications. So it’s probably not coming as a total surprise to you that my main learning goals this year evolve around AI evals, “which are systematic tests and measurements to that
What I don’t understand about AI evals (yet) Read More »
You know the feature inside out. You have tested it, broken it, rebuilt the test suite around it twice. So you ask the AI to generate a few test cases. Save yourself twenty minutes. What comes back looks reasonable. The structure is right. The naming conventions are close enough. Then you start reading. The first
You were promised speed. You got a new job instead. Read More »
