Slashdot Mirror

And yet, in Moscow, that might be a reasonable city planning decision. The workability of comments deeply depends on the signal-to-noise ratio. Incidentally, some journals have curated comments sections that are quite excellent; I don't think they're in danger like Popular Science's. Remember, today's story was prompted by fears of promoting inflation of conflict, not just worthless posts.

What was the rational for this? Why would they continue on with such crap?

They've fallen for the sunk costs fallacy. If they were to change to something else, they'd be admitting that they made a poor decision in choosing Lotus Notes in the first place.

In my experience it is more that the soul sucking nature of Notes administers a thousand tiny disappointments every day, but it still gets the job done. And if the company is using Notes for applications beyond email/calendar, the implementation costs of a migration can run into the millions of dollars, even leaving out the software costs.

What was the rational for this? Why would they continue on with such crap?

They've fallen for the sunk costs fallacy. If they were to change to something else, they'd be admitting that they made a poor decision in choosing Lotus Notes in the first place.

Your mistake is thinking that companies use rational thought processes when making decisions. An even bigger mistake is thinking that the people making the decisions are looking out for the best interest of the company, instead of their own best interests.

App Store is not a package manager, it's an application distribution system.

I'm not seeing the difference. Applications come in packages, and a distribution system manages them. A claim of the form "X is not A; it's B" is easier to understand if you explain what essential difference you see between A and B. Otherwise, I call fallacy.

I guess it would be easier to state that while application are packages, packages are not necessarily applications. So a package manager might be an application distribution system, but an application distribution system is not a package manager. In simpler terms - an application distribution system incorporates a very specific set of functionality, removing several aspects of a general package management system, including things like dependency hierarchies which can cause problems cross-applications, especially regarding versioning, thus avoiding several potential problem areas by only deploying a self-contained application. (Just IMHO)

App Store is not a package manager, it's an application distribution system.

I'm not seeing the difference. Applications come in packages, and a distribution system manages them. A claim of the form "X is not A; it's B" is easier to understand if you explain what essential difference you see between A and B. Otherwise, I call fallacy.