A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> Recently, many software visualization (SV) techniques and tools have become available to developers in order to help them understand their software. In our project, firstly, we identified a list of SV tools that we described, and evaluated qualitatively using the taxonomy of Price et al. Our experience with this taxonomy as well as the impact of the qualitative evaluation on Bell Canada will be discussed in this paper. Then, a quantitative evaluation was conducted in spring 2000 with more than 100 participants. In this paper, we especially put the emphases on the perspectives of the results, by reporting on our experiences and by discussing the major findings and their impact. <s> BIB001 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> At last! New experiences and lessons from one of the authors who brought you Software Metrics: Establishing a Company-Wide Program. This exciting book has over 70 charts and graphs from real projects that will help you to manage software projects and process improvements more effectively. Project managers: Learn through practical examples what to measure and track, which will help you more effectively manage your projects throughout the life cycle. Learn how to measure and present progress. Most importantly, learn why you need to measure and how important it is for you to tie your measurements to visible, agreed-upon project goals. People responsible for process improvement: Learn a useful model for understanding organizational limitations. Explore the relationship between tools and the potential for achieving improvements. Examine some of the potential problems you might face and see examples of how some of them have been avoided. Finally, discover how metrics can be rolled up into useful, balanced organizational indicators. This book emphasizes proven practices and results.These include: *Which software development "rules" are supported by measured evidence *How measurement should be tightly linked to organizational strategies *How the metrics that engineers find useful help project managers as well *What people feel about metrics and what approaches you can take to gain their support *How metrics are used to achieve continuous process improvement *Which measures are meaningful for a large organization <s> BIB002 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> A model for software product quality is defined, it has been formulated by associating a set of quality-carrying properties with each of the structural forms that are used to define the statements and statement components of a programming language. These quality-carrying properties are in turn linked to the high-level quality attributes of the International Standard for Software Product Evaluation ISO-9126. The model supports building quality into software, definition of language-specific coding standards, systematically classifying quality defects, and the development of automated code auditors for detecting defects in software. > <s> BIB003 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> As Component-based Software Development (CBSD) starts to be effectively used, some software vendors have commenced to successfully sell and license commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components. One of the most critical processes in CBSD is the selection of the COTS components that meet the user requirements. Current proposals have shown how to deal with the functional aspects of this evaluation process. However, there is a lack of appropriate quality models that allow an effective assessment of COTS components. Besides, the international standards that address the software products' quality issues (in particular, those from ISO and IEEE) have shown to be too general for dealing with the specific characteristics of software components. In this position paper we propose a quality model for CBSD based on ISO 9126, that defines a set of quality attributes and their associated metrics for the effective evaluation of COTS components. <s> BIB004 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> The quality of the software is critical and essential in different types of organizations. In some types of software, poor quality of the software product in sensitive systems (such as: real-time systems, control systems, etc.) may lead to loss of human life, permanent injury, mission failure, or financial loss. In software engineering literature, there are a number of quality models in which they contain a number of quality characteristics (or factors, as called in some models). These quality characteristics could be used to reflect the quality of the software product from the view of that characteristic. Selecting which one of the quality models to use is a real challenge. In this paper, we will discuss the contents of the following quality models: McCall’s quality model, Boehm’s quality model, Dromey's quality model, FURPS quality model and ISO 9126 quality model. In addition, we will focus on a comparison between these quality models, and find the key differences between them. [Journal of American Science 2010; 6(3):166-175]. (ISSN: 1545-1003). <s> BIB005 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> Software quality is the totality of features and characteristics of a product or a service that bears on its ability to satisfy the given needs. Poor quality of the software product in sensitive systems may lead to loss of human life, permanent injury, mission failure, or financial loss. So the quality of the project should be maintained at appropriate label. To maintain the quality, there are different quality models. ″A high quality product is one which has associated with it a number of quality factors. These could be described in the requirements specification; they could be cultured, in that they are normally associated with the artifact through familiarity of use and through the shared experience of users. In this paper, we will discuss all the quality models: McCall's quality model, Boehm's quality model, Dromey's quality model, and FURPS quality model and focus on a comparison between these models, and find the key differences between them. <s> BIB006 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> ￻ Abstract: - Nowadays, software products rapidly increased and it is usage not limited to specific people or corporation. It is now used in the most of human life activities. Therefore, the quality of the software product is increasingly being important and the users demanding higher quality than ever before. However, most of this research is focused on the internal/development view of quality. Hence, in software development, strong attention must be given to the user's satisfaction. Recently, the studies intend to understand the users' perspective of the software quality. In this study, we intend to discuss the characteristics of the software products that influence the users' satisfaction on software quality. Based on the well-known software quality models and the emotion of the software users, a model of software quality evaluation based on users' views is proposed. one of these approaches is a user perceived quality. That it means a combination of product attributes which provide the greatest satisfaction to a specified user. According to Bevan (6), the expectation of software quality in both consumer and professional market is rapidly increased. That is, matching the software product with the real users needs is increasingly demanded. Moreover, he state that it is not enough sufficient to deliver a software product has a technical excellence. Also, it has to be easy to use and suitable for the end users in the work practices and activates, either the users are normal consumer or professionals. However, Chulani (2, 7) presented software product quality from customer's perspective, and the companies can increase the revenue by increase customer's satisfaction and improve the quality of the software product. That is in order to develop any software product, the user's requirements have to be addressed either functional and non-functional (quality of services) (8). <s> BIB007 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> With the objective of presenting qualitative software system most of the software producers have endeavoured and infact this is their main purpose. Software quality is having multi-dimensional content which may be distinguished and measured easily. To be specific, with the idea of determining the multidimensional content in a more exact pattern various qualitative models have been presented by virtue of which different aspects of this matter have been attempted to be investigated properly. Practically as because there are existences of different models which have used different expressions the comprehension of this basic content have become to some extent hard or difficult. Attempts have been made in this particular paper to introduce some models that have been mentioned and more clearly analysis the qualitative characteristics and side-by-side determine the software quality along with the analytical comparison of these models. This paper may serve the purpose of a reference for investigating software quality and its related models. <s> BIB008 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> Measuring and evaluating software quality has become a fundamental task. Many models have been proposed to support stakeholders in dealing with software quality. However, in most cases, quality models do not fit perfectly for the target application context. Since approaches for efficiently adapting quality models are largely missing, many quality models in practice are built from scratch or reuse only high-level concepts of existing models. We present a tool-supported approach for the efficient adaptation of quality models. An initial empirical investigation indicates that the quality models obtained applying the proposed approach are considerably more consistently and appropriately adapted than those obtained following an ad-hoc approach. Further, we could observe that model adaptation is significantly more efficient (~factor 8) when using this approach. <s> BIB009 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> Siemens Corporate Development Center Asia Australia (CT DC AA) develops and maintains software applications for the Industry, Energy, Healthcare, and Infrastructure & Cities sectors of Siemens. The critical nature of these applications necessitates a high level of software design quality. A survey of software architects indicated a low level of satisfaction with existing design assessment practices in CT DC AA and highlighted several shortcomings of existing practices. To address this, we have developed a design assessment method called MIDAS (Method for Intensive Design ASsessments). MIDAS is an expert-based method wherein manual assessment of design quality by experts is directed by the systematic application of design analysis tools through the use of a three view-model consisting of design principles, project-specific constraints, and an “ility”-based quality model. In this paper, we describe the motivation for MIDAS, its design, and its application to three projects in CT DC AA. We believe that the insights from our MIDAS experience not only provide useful pointers to other organizations and practitioners looking to assess and improve software design quality but also suggest research questions for the software engineering community to explore. <s> BIB010 </s> A Review of Software Quality Models for the Evaluation of Software Products <s> Figure 1 Quality Models <s> Software quality is the totality of features and characteristics of a product or a service that bears on its ability to satisfy the given needs. Software quality model is the representation of the characteristics of the software that describe the quality. The benefit of quality models is that they are simpler to use and the benefit of quality management is that they probably more to the point capture the idea of quality . So the quality of the project should be maintained at appropriate label. To maintain the quality, there are different quality models. "A high quality product is one which has associated with it a number of quality factors. These could be described in the requirements specification; they could be cultured, in that they are normally associated with the artifact through familiarity of use and through the shared experience of users. In this paper, we will compare all the quality models: McCall’s quality model, Boehm’s quality model, Dromey's quality model, and ISO 9126 quality model and focus on a comparison between these models, and find the key differences between them. <s> BIB011
The Basic Models are hierarchical in structure; they can be adjusted to any type of software product and are oriented to the evaluation and improvement. The six most important are: Mc Call et al in 1977  , Boehm et al in 1978 BIB001 , FURPS Model in1992 BIB002 , Dromey model in 1995 BIB003 , ISO 9126-1 model in 2001  and its standards for both external metrics: ISO / IEC 9126-2 in 2003  , internal metrics: ISO / IEC 9126-3 in 2003 [12] and quality in use: ISO / IEC 9126-4 in 2004  . The ISO -9126 model received inputs from previous models and sets standards for assessing the quality of software. In 2007 an updated was established as the ISO 25010 model: ISO / IEC CD 25010  . The ISO 25010 actually is known as SQuaRE (Software engineering-Software product Quality Requirements and Evaluation). Tailored Quality Models began to appear the year 2001 with Bertoa model BIB004 , followed by Georgiadou Model in 2003  , Alvaro Model in 2005  , Rawashdesh Model  . The main characteristic is that they are specific to a particular domain of application and the importance of features may be variable in relation to a general model. These models arise from the need of organizations and the software industry for specific quality models capable of doing specialized evaluation on individual components. They are built from the Basic Models, especially the ISO 9126, with the adding or modification of sub factors and the goal to meet needs of specific domains or specialized applications. In recent years the software construction has focused on the reuse and development of Component-Based Software (CBSD). As a consequence the success of a product strongly depends on the quality of the components. Other authors classify the models according to user's characteristics. For example Klas BIB009 distinguishes three categories of models that correspond to: 1) the level of general public use or specific domain, 2) organizational level that focus on satisfying the interests of a specific organization, and 3) the level project that applies to a specific project to ensure quality. Due to the importance of COTS components Ayala  establishes a process to select software components. It was based on observations and interviews with developers of COTS-based components. The study concludes with varying results. One of the findings was discovering the use of informal procedures to find, evaluate and choose components, and hence there exists the need for methods to do components selection and support tools to help in the evaluation. Some companies have also developed their own quality models, like the FURPS model BIB002 already mentioned and set by Hewlett Packard. A recent work by Samarthyam is the MIDAS model (Method for Intensive Design assessments) BIB010 established by the company Siemens that is used for the design of software products in the industry, energy, Health and Infrastructure. A description of some particular models used in businesses may be found in Pensionwar  and quality modelling for software product lines in Trendowicz  . We notice that many efforts have been done for the development of software product quality models. Furthermore several authors have done reviews of the literature on quality models and they included some benchmarking. Among these works we can mention: Al-Badareen in 2011 BIB007 , Dubey in 2012 BIB008 , Al-Qutaish in 2010 BIB005 , Ghayathri in 2013 BIB011 and Samadhiya in 2013 BIB006 . All these works refer to the Basic Quality Models. In this work we review the literature of software product quality models including the Basic Models and the Tailored Models and based on the ISO 25010 model we perform a comparative evaluation. Finally and because of the increasing importance we include a review of product-oriented models for Open/Free Software. This paper is organized as follows: section 2 describes the methodology used and a common terminology, shown in Table 1 is established, section 3 describes the Basic Quality Models, Section 4 describes some Tailored Quality Models according to their relevance, section 5 considers the Free Software oriented models, in Section 6 we make a comparative assessment of the models and in Section 7 some conclusions are established.