An Efficient and Objective Generalized Comparison technique for Software Quality Models

Published Online December 2015 in MECS DOI: 10.5815/ijmecs.2015.12.08

Quality includes all appearances and significant characteristics of an artifact or an action which recount to the substantial of given requests. Software is perilous in establishing a economical advantage to many organizations [1], and is gradually fetching the important aspects of production processes, products and facilities. Software engineering [2] including

Software Quality as its essential aspect has an association to the enlargement and advancement of big, multifaceted and vital software-intensive system. Researchers [3] have made enormous efforts to bring about new dimensions in software engineering aspects including quality perspective. Software systems are anticipated to be more flexible, accessible and recyclable.

• A.    McCall’s Model

McCall J.A [4] proposed the first quality model. To plan a complete design of the products quality through its several features was fundamental intention behind this proposal. There are 3 types of quality classifications for a software product i.e. quality related to Product Operation (correctness, reliability, efficiency, integrity and usability) quality related to Product Revision (maintainability, flexibility and testability), and quality related to Product Transition (portability, reusability and interoperability). McCall tries to connect the break between clients and engineers by focusing on various programming quality angles that uncover both the client's perception and the designer's significances.

• B.    Furps Quality Model

  Robert Grady and Hewlett Packard designed Furps model [7] in 1978. Quality attributes are classified by this model into in two types of requirements namely functional and non-functional requirements. Functional requirement are well-defined by response and predictable

results , while nonfunctional requirement are emergent and expected behaviors of system. Weakness of the this model is that it miscarries to take into account the interpretation of the portability of software product. Two steps are well-thought-out when this model is used: characterizing quality traits and setting priority. Caswell and Grady considered that establishing needs is critical given the inherent trade-off, i.e. one quality can be picked up at the expense of alternate.

• C.    ISO 9216

One of the International standards for the progression of software is “ISO 9126”. The standard is distributed into two parts which covers the Internal and External Quality Attributes. The properties of the system [8] that can be assessed without accomplishing are covered by the internal quality attributes. While the framework qualities that may be assessed by seeing the framework during its execution comes under the subject of External quality characteristics. ISO 9126 Part-1 is an extension of previous work done by McCall (1977), Boehm (1978), FURPS. The model [9] trails the factor-criteria-metric model and classifies software quality characteristics into six self-governing high-level quality characteristics. Each of these is separated into subordinate quality characteristics.

• D.    IEEE’s Quality Model

  Several standards have been released by IEEE [10]; one of related to quality assurance is IEEE STD 7301998. Software Quality Assurance Plans is basic agenda of this IEEE’s Standard. Basically It is activity based quality model IEEE 1219 std. IEEE Model is concerned with basically providing a standard for maintenance of software by delivering a qualitative model. This standard gives an incremental procedure to association and execution of programming support events. Supplementary standards are also defined i.e. software quality assurance, verification and validation, software configuration management in which associated processes (external processes). This model illustrates and represents numerous dimensions of qualitative factors.

• E.    Evans and Marciniak Quality Model

  Two substitute models have developed after the McCall model; first one is the Evans and Marciniak quality model 1987. These two models [11] convey new inspiration on software quality. Together these models eliminate testability from the McCall model. The Evans and Marciniak model has twelve factors that are grouped into three categories: design, performance and adaptation. Two of the factors proposed by the innovative models are very analogous to the factors of McCall model. Verifiability, security and manageability are the three new factors. Verifiability defines structures design and programming that allows effective certification of design and programming. Safety’s [12] main concerns are design to remove peril circumstances for operators of tools as an outcome of faults in method regulator software. These errors can degenerate into inappropriate reaction to

dangerous situations or failure to

• F.    Deutsch & Wills Quality Model

  The Deutsch and Willis model is also an alternative model that has developed in 1988 after the McCall’s model. This model too eliminate the testability factor from McCall’s model together with Evans and Marciniak quality model which was developed before the Deutsch and Willis model. It has fifteen factors grouped into four classes: operating, performance, change and management.

• II.    Literature Review