<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Fail Fast</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/micahel/archive/2005/08/17/FailFast.aspx</link><description>The only way to succeed is to fail. Therefore, fail early and often. Think about the last time you attempted something new and you succeeded right out of the gate. Do you have any clue why? Do you know whether the approach you took is the only one that</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Fail Fast</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/micahel/archive/2005/08/17/FailFast.aspx#452770</link><pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2005 22:12:21 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:452770</guid><dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator><description>Well, I disagree with, &amp;quot;the ONLY way to succeed is to fail&amp;quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I prefer to look at it more like &amp;quot;You only FAILED if you learned nothing from the attempt&amp;quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Succeeding on the first try should not be made into some kind of a lack, or looked at as being lazy or not-learning.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Other than that, nice entry.  Failure should NOT be made out to be bad, just as you state.</description></item><item><title>Suggested Reading - 2005-08-24</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/micahel/archive/2005/08/17/FailFast.aspx#455753</link><pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2005 22:42:59 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:455753</guid><dc:creator>Rob Caron's Blog - A Team System Nexus</dc:creator><description>… for Architects&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Nick Malik – Enterprise Architecture Agility &lt;br&gt;Roy Osherove – [Audio Interview] Ingo...</description></item><item><title>re: Fail Fast</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/micahel/archive/2005/08/17/FailFast.aspx#458465</link><pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:06:38 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:458465</guid><dc:creator>saulj</dc:creator><description>In general, it seems that you are trying to say that failure isn't necessarily bad and I agree with that, espeically if you are continually examining your tests. Like Bob, it is not really clear to me that failure leads to success, rather it is an event that is an invitation to re-examine the techniques you are using to gain your goal. In addition, there are both practice and performance modes. It is easy to say that failure leads to success when we just look at performances (e.g. last time I ran the mile, I didn't finish, this time I did), but, in truth, the successes are based on many successes while in practice mode. However, I think you're saying the same thing as a poster in my gym: It is not important that you get knocked down, rather what you do when you get back up. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;P.S. I really enjoy your blog, very helpful professionally as well as personally. Thanks!</description></item></channel></rss>