Software testing occurs near the end of the programming process. Because of this, if a project falls behind schedule, testing time is often reduced. What are the possible impacts of less-than-thorough testing? Topics might include company reputation, customer dissatisfaction, the company’s ability to sell new or updated products, etc. Which is worse: A company can release product late or release it on time without fully testing it. Which one do you think it's worse?

it seems that the company is following the old waterfall model, and in this first, the development work is completed, and finally, the testing process is being executed. And it seems there is no planning done here as well. Software engineering teaches us the Agile method, and in this after every phase, the testing is done, and that too by the testers of the company, sometimes team leader and project managers as well, and also by the client. And by all the bug is being reported immediately, and details are sent to the developer, who fixes it immediately. However, in the waterfall model, the testing is done at the last, after completion of all processes, and if now the bug is found, it needs to be checked thoroughly the whole software. And this is impossible to complete in time on most of the occasions. And in such cases its better to release products late after complete testing. The worse is certainly to release it on time without fully testing it. And suppose you release and the company loses, 1 billion dollars due to a security bug. It can be deadly, and hence no software company can afford it. Complete testing is a must before the launch. And also it's important to not use the waterfall model, and use the Agile approach for software development. The waterfall model threatens company reputation, and also raises issues like company dissatisfaction. And it also puts the question mark on the company's ability to sell the new or updated products etc.

Explanation:

Please check the answer section.

answer; wireshark;