Yeah - I mean, when I wrote the comment I ignored all the absolute disaster-projects I've seen. But those where doomed on so many levels I don't even wanna blame waterfall or agile or the in-betweens.
So, "if you ignore the ones without iterations, I've never seen a waterfall model implemented without iterations."
We can't be sure there wouldn't have been any iterations. In (what's traditionally been called) the waterfall model, there's so long between iterations that the project has time to fail and be scrapped before there ever is one.
Hah yeah i guess you can interpret it like that, but i give the same leeway to agile when they skip the retros and the planning before the sprints etc. You cant blame the process if you dont even make an attempt of adhering to it :)