Comparing SDA vs ADD
Structured Design Analysis (SDA) and Architectural Design & Development (ADD) are both methods of software design, but they differ in several key areas. SDA focuses on a more detailed and methodical approach to software design that is well documented and repeatable. ADD, on the other hand, is a more ‘freeform’ approach that provides designers with more flexibility in the creation of their software.
When deciding between the two methods, the most important factor to consider is the type of software you’re designing. SDA is great for legacy systems, which are often highly structured and complex. ADD is a better choice for newer, more modern software applications that require rapid development and greater flexibility.
In terms of documentation, SDA produces more detailed and methodical documents and analyses. ADD documents are simpler and provide more of a ‘big picture’ overview of the design.
Another key difference between SDA and ADD is the implementation process. SDA follows a top-down approach, while ADD follows a bottom-up approach. SDA focuses on gradually refining the design until it meets the requirements set out in the design documents. ADD focuses on quickly creating a working prototype and then gradually refining it until it meets the requirements.
At the end of the day, the most important factor to consider when choosing between SDA and ADD is the type of software being designed. Each method has its own strengths and weaknesses, so it’s important to carefully consider which one is the best choice for the given software application.