QuickTopic free message boards logo
Skip to Messages

TOPIC:

Software Economics 2014

^     All messages            148-163 of 163  132-147 >>
163
Marlon DumasPerson was signed in when posted
01-21-2015
04:55 AM ET (US)
All grades are now available here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?ke...e&gid=3&output=html

Sample solutions (not necessarily "perfect", but enough to give an idea) are available here:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/155657...ketchySolutions.zip

If you think a mistake has been done when grading your exam, please drop me an e-mail.

The grades will be entered in the study information system on Monday.

On behalf of the lecturing team, thank you very much for your continued engagement throughout the semester. It was a pleasure for us to run this course with you this semester. We hope to see some of you in the student startup camp and in the courses "business process management" and "software entrepreneurship project" next semester.
162
Marlon DumasPerson was signed in when posted
01-18-2015
07:12 PM ET (US)
Questions about study regulations are best addressed to the Dean's office, for example to Hanna-Liisa Ennet. Some information can also be found in the University web pages:
http://www.ut.ee/en/studies/study-regulations/
I shall stop posting my own perceptions of the study regulations in this forum.
161
Joybeyondlimits
01-18-2015
01:21 PM ET (US)
Hi,

As far as what was conveyed to us previously, retake exams would not be reflected as an extra exam in the transcript.
However we are very thankful for the news about economics, but it would add color to everybody's life if such confirmations come for ESI!

Aitah!
160
Marlon DumasPerson was signed in when posted
01-18-2015
05:03 AM ET (US)
Retake exams are only for students who "fail" the regular exam. The grade obtained in the retake grade does not "erase" the grade obtained in the regular exam. The retake grade comes "in addition to" the first grade obtained, meaning that both grades are recorded and appear in the transcripts.
Anyway, I am hopeful that we will not need a retake exam in this course (i.e. that everybody will pass). We are finalizing the grading and we will publish the grades towards the middle of the week.
159
retake
01-17-2015
06:01 PM ET (US)
is it possible for this course to retake the final exam even if someone 'did not fail'... If not, is it possible that someone says that he doesnt want his final exam (the one with no grades yet) to be corrected? This way he will be able to take the retake exam in an innovative way :D
Edited 01-17-2015 06:03 PM
158
Marlon DumasPerson was signed in when posted
01-12-2015
07:35 PM ET (US)
Page 54 is saying that an error message can be a DET within a transaction.
Page 55 is saying that an error message is not a transaction on its own.
In other words, an error message should be counted as a DET within the transaction where the error occurs. It should not be counted as a separate transaction on its own.
157
Student
01-12-2015
07:33 PM ET (US)
Last question before exam. I reread the slides on FPA an found one interesting thing.
https://courses.cs.ut.ee/MTAT.03.244/2014_.../Main/workshop2.pdf
On the page 54 it is written:

Data element types for External Outputs
- Error messages
...


Whereas on page 55 it is written:

These are NOT External Outputs
- Error message, confirmation message
...

Which page should we trust?

Thanks.
156
Marlon DumasPerson was signed in when posted
01-12-2015
06:58 PM ET (US)
Maybe my previous answer was not fully clear, so I post below a sample solution to the FP question from last year showing how the "Comments" column can be used to briefly explain how the counting is done:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/155657...SampleSolution.xlsx
I'm not saying the above solution is flawless - but it is fair enough and explains concisely what is counted.
In this solution, create/edit operations are collapsed into one, which is fair enough and reflects how some modern (especially Web-based) systems are designed.
155
Marlon DumasPerson was signed in when posted
01-12-2015
06:35 PM ET (US)
@Octa, sorry I forgot to reply to that question. You do not need to justify every singe DET individually. You should given your answer using the workbook and you can write some very short explanations in a "Comments" column (which you can add at the end of the spreadsheet). But you don't need to justify every singe DET. The examples we use in the exams are so simple that there is no need for detailed one-by-one DET counting.
154
OctaPerson was signed in when posted
01-12-2015
05:21 PM ET (US)
I think I haven't express myself very well. What I was asking is whether for each transaction found it is required to write down all the DETs we think will be on the page, or we should just need to count them and write the corresponding number of DETs, without further explanations?
153
Eerik
01-12-2015
05:09 PM ET (US)
Got it, thanks!
152
Marlon DumasPerson was signed in when posted
01-12-2015
04:31 PM ET (US)
Hi Eerik, I wasn't suggesting to bring the system down for a year, I'm not that crazy... I was suggesting an approach to analyze the investment, where the investment is modeled as starting to produce revenues in 2015, meaning that it is only in 2015 that the investment starts to pay off. This way, the calculated payback period reflects the time when the new system has paid off by itself (rather than having revenues generated using the old systems count towards the calculation of the payback period of the new system).
In other words, I propose to treat the revenue of 2014 as not being part of the investment scenario so that the payback period is calculated based only on revenue generated using the new system (and same for NPV, IRR, etc.)
BTW, the scenario of this exam is closely based on a real scenario. And tip: the investment was made. And people understood that the fact the there is no revenue in 2014 is just because the investment is projected in 2015, so that the payback is in 2016. But of course, this is a choice of calculation methodology and one could use a different methodology.
So yes, we understand the choice you would be making by counting the 2014 revenue in the investment scenario. While we might not fully agree with this choice, we would not deduct any significant amount of marks for it.
151
Marlon DumasPerson was signed in when posted
01-12-2015
04:20 PM ET (US)
To: Octa: You can post your own solutions here (e.g. just put the file in your homepage on kodu.ut.ee and post the link). Because the numbers don't tell enough.
150
Eerik
01-12-2015
01:18 PM ET (US)
@Marlon
Thanks for the answer about the last years exam, but I'm not really fully satisfied with it. The thing is that this just does not make any sense :) In the real world, building a new system with the 1 year long downtime would be suicide. You would pretty much have to start your business over, because you would lose a lot (all?) the customers. And even if you do start over, keeping the revenue at the same level (and even increasing it by 5%) would be impossible. But, nevertheless, this is not real life but an assignment. I just want to know, with this specific case, if the similar scenario is in the tomorrows exam, would it be wrong solution to add the initial system cost/revenue to the implementation phase?
149
VM
01-12-2015
10:46 AM ET (US)
Hello,
my results of Task 2 from last year exam:

NPV 8 018 462
IRR 90,43%
Payback period ~2 years and 7 months from 2013
ROI 216,35%

Marlon, due to different results, is it possible to publish correct solution?
148
OctaPerson was signed in when posted
01-12-2015
09:00 AM ET (US)
Hello,

I have a question regarding the first exercise in the 2014 exam. In the requirements it is mentioned that we need to give the number of DETs and FTRs for each transaction. I was wondering if we need to write them down (e.g. text field for customer name, text field for address), or are we supposed just to put the number there?

Thank you,
Octavian
^     All messages            148-163 of 163  132-147 >>

Print | RSS Views: 4388 (Unique: 460 ) / Subscribers: 41 | What's this?