Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!malgudi!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!nrc.com!nic.csu.net!usc!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!europa.asd.contel.com!wlbr!lonex.radc.af.mil!hawksk
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: RE:COCOMO
Message-ID: <1991Jun20.121815.17917@lonex.radc.af.mil>
From: hawksk@lonex.radc.af.mil (Kenneth B. Hawks)
Date: 20 Jun 91 12:18:15 GMT
Sender: hawksk@lonex.radc.af.mil (Kenneth B. Hawks)
Organization: RADC
Lines: 29

Sender:Kenneth B. Hawks

IMHO there is no universal solvent.  Having used COCOMO to cost software
developments from both the government and industry side it has its uses.
Note there are numerous implementations of the basic COCOMO formula.  I 
have used 4 or 5 of them.  COCOMO is _very_ people skill oriented.  The
experience variables selected cause the largest swings in the final
result.  

In contrast, RCA Price S, is very end use complexity sensitive.  

Both models have uses.  As a previous poster pointed out, calibration of
any costing model is a *must*.  Performing a sensitivity analysis of _your_
project is also a must.  My personal approach was to calibrate the models,
spend a couple of days honestly evaluating the team make-up I could expect,
the various complexities of the functions to be developed and then input
to the models.  If the answers came out within 5 - 10%, I bid it and was
comfortable that I had bid enough manpower.  I have done this on complex
assembly language and Ada jobs (the first was utilizing the very first
validated Ada compiler!)  Every job was on schedule and under budget.  One
job was 3 mandays over (out of 1809 costed), but the $ were under because
I was able to move the high salary guys off the job early :-)

My  $0.02....

Kenneth B. Hawks                                   |\   /|   "Fox Forever"
Rome Laboratory, Griffiss AFB, NY                   ^o.o^         BSA
hawksk@lonex.radc.af.mil                            =(v)=
Disclaimer:  There is no one else here who thinks like I do; therefore....