HN Explorer

Ask HN: How to explain to a non-tech that bug fixing gets charged?

12 points by alcuadrado ↗ HN
Today I was talking with a photographer and a designer, and one of them commented about an acquaintance having made a mistake at work and correcting it with her own money, what I replied that I charge my clients for fixing my own errors (of course there are exceptions). They couldn't believe it, and I failed to convince them that its normal, and makes sense. How would you explain it?

6 comments

[ 5.2 ms ] story [ 30.7 ms ] thread
pestaa
To me, software bugs are not inherently visible in a way that a bad photo is.

Unless tests, QA and the like were listed on the requirements list, I believe most fixes should be charged, too. Of course when tests are required and written according to the contract, and obvious bugs still fall through the cracks, that is an entirely different matter.

This is a difficult subject imho, because most employers are not willing to pay for testing and, unfortunately, not for fixing the consequences, either.

jnorthrop
Simple: No piece of software is perfect and bugs should be expected. You charge for work at an hourly rate. A bug fix requires additional hours of work. Therefore you charge for fixing bugs.
alcuadrado
That's what I said, but try it yourself and you will discover that it makes no sense for most other people
sojourner
Actors don't get paid just for performances, or for only the performances in which they deliver the lines perfectly. They get paid for rehearsals, costume time, makeup time, etc., and for the performances in which they missed their cue, came on stage early, left l

Creating software is a creative process, and there is rarely an end point where the software is completely bug-free, or where there is absolutely no further improvement which can be made.

Bugs are like flubbed lines. They happen. They always happen. And coders get paid for fixing them.

If your doctor makes a mistake, does he give you a refund? Or does he charge both for the mistake and the new fix? Your lawyer?

rmATinnovafy
Bugs are not mistakes. They are flaws. Two different things.

If you were fixing cars, then you could call a mistake if you put the wrong oil in the engine. That you would need to cover.

But if you changed the oil, and the oil turned out to be "bad" ( for a lack of a better term ), then the oil had bugs in it. It was flawed.

caw
I think the commonality is that all 3 professions would get paid for updates the clients requested, but mistakes made by the professional would have to get covered.

Updates: Additional photography sittings, design modifications, bug fixes.

Mistakes: Lost data, work that is later found to not meet the spec.

But in the end, it all comes down to how you want to run your business. If you charge the customer for whatever extra you're doing, what's going to be the result of this? Are you going to chase them off? Get a bad recommendation? Is there no harm at all?

Depending on that outcome and what you want, you can probably find the answer as to whether you should cover it or not.