Waterfall also consists of those phases. One core idea of agile is instead of a big design up front to iterate those phases as fast as possible because often the requirements are not clear from the beginning and you have to see if your ideas bring value to the stakeholders. The problem is that not all tasks can be done in a short time and sometimes need more planning. Planning is often neglected in agile environments. In some environments you also know the requirements beforehand (because they stem from the law for instance), agile development does not work there.
I completely agree. In my early agile training, the instructor stated it was good for developing where requirements were unclear or responding to small feature requests quickly, due to the fast iterative approach with feedback.
He also said that agile was not a substitute for planning.
I guess those lessons weren't learned by everyone...
Yep, the design phase shouldn't be an exclusive OR between a large-scale design & small-scale designs with iteration. It should be both: plan the large-scale architecture, marking the bits which are unknown, then iteratively design & build to fill out the unknowns & build the rest of the design. It's a recursive process.
solve([problems])
1. Define car(problems).
2. Plan a solution.
3. Implement the solution.
4. Test the solution.
5. Document the results. Add any problems discovered to the list.
6. solve(cdr(problems))
