Slashdot Mirror
How To Make Software Projects Fail
Bob Abooey writes: "SoftwareMarketSolution has an interesting interview of Joel Spolsky, of Joel on Software fame. Joel, a former programmer at Microsoft, discusses some of the reasons he thinks some very popular software companies or projects fail, including Netscape, Lotus 123, Borland, etc." This interview brings out some mild boiler-room stories which sound like they could be the basis of a good book, along the lines of Soul of a New Machine .
team fallout says new goatseeeee mother fuckerrrsssss!
Team fallout had an article about this a while ago.
ahem. what was NT for? sometimes, you just have to come to terms with the fact that as tested, bug-fixed and studied as a chunk of code may be, it was developed as part of a misconceived model of either visible functionality or internal architecture or both. DOS and its progeny like win32 were clearly cases of this, and MS weathered a complete rewrite c/o cutler and co. quite happily. the fact that there are examples of disastrous complete rewrites doesn't mean that the examples that worked are meaningless.
Trying to hire female and minorities as a quota in a large rapidly growing software company is a sure way to doom a company.
Instead of merit or intelligence, to limit the number of asian men and white men, quotas are used.
The result.... some of the absolute most horrible coders imaginable are hired and cause much to grind team spirit to a halt and then into negagive land as all the gurus start to flee the company to consult or start their own startups.
No one left is capable of properly hiring any more guru-level candidates.
Eventually the average IQ starts to drop for the entire engineering department.
I have seen it at many companies that self destructed rapidly.
This white-guilt thing is ridiculous.
And, just because I have a somewhat mis-understood past doesn't mean I can't change and start using my powers for good instead of evil...:)
All the best,
--Bob
Let's have a close look at the costs involved when running a Linux system.
An important factor in Linux' cost is its maintenance. Linux requires a *lot* of maintenance, work doable only by the relatively few high-paid Linux administrators that put themselves - of course willingly - at a great place in the market. Linux seems to be needing maintenance continuously, to keep it from breaking down.
Add to this the cost of loss of data. Linux' native file system, EXT2FS, is known to lose data like a firehose spouts water when the file system isn't unmounted properly. Other unix file systems are much more tolerant towards unexpected crashes. An example is the FreeBSD file system, which with soft updates enabled, performance-wise blows EXT2FS out of the water, and doesn't have the negative drawback of extreme data loss in case of a system breakdown.
According to Linux advocates, an alternative to EXT2FS would be ReiserFS. Unfortunately, ReiserFS is still in beta stage. This means it is not intended for production use (although according to many Linux advocates this shouldn't be a problem, which makes me wonder how (little) valuable they find your data).
The other proposed 'solution', EXT3FS, is nothing more than an ugly hack to put journaling into the file system. All the drawbacks of the ancient EXT2FS file system remain in EXT3FS, for the sake of 'forward- and backward compatibility'. This is interesting, considering that the DOS heritage in the Windows 9x/ME series was considered a very bad thing by the Linux community, even though it provided what could be called one of the best examples of compatibility, ever. When it's about Linux, compatibility constraints don't seem to be that much of a problem for Linux advocates.
Back to Linux' cost. Factor in also the fact that crashes happen much more often on Linux than on other unices. On other unices, crashes usually are caused by external sources like power outages. Crashes in Linux are a regular thing, and nobody seems to know what causes them, internally. Linux advocates try to hide this fact by denying crashes ever happen. Instead, they have frequent "hardware problems".
The steep learning curve compared to about any other operating system out there is a major factor in Linux' cost. The system is a mix of features from all kinds of unices, but not one of them is implemented right. A Linux user has to live with badly coded tools which have low performance, mangle data seemingly at random and are not in line with their specification. On top of that a lot of them spit out the most childish and unprofessional messages, indicating that they were created by 14-year olds with too much time, no talent and a bad attitude.
I could go on and on and on, but the conclusion is clear. Linux is not an option for any one who seeks a professional OS with high performance, scalability, stability, adherence to standards, etc.
reaper is just angry because he's an unemployed 3rd tier compsci student.
:-(
Meanwhile, MS hires the best & brightest from top schools. Poor guy. I'd be bitter too.
I'm glad to see that this troll finally hooked some /bots. Good job!
Damn it, when will you juveniles stop getting your jollies impersonating people ? From Wil Wheaton to Bruce Perens to Anne Marie, it seems there is always some kid who gets some weird fix off of faking a post to look like it came from someone interesting.
Look, you know if you posted those comments under your own name someone might even consider them interesting in their own right ? Did you ever think of that ?
can i just say fuck business? the deeper i get into this shit the more i find people bitching about their stupid pet peeves as if they really matter. fuck joel software. software is irrelevant and useless. talk about alienated labor. you fucking people (and me too, i'm a programmer as well) make jobs for people out of thin air. network administrator? q/a? tech support? what the fuck is that?
how stupid are you?
asc(chr(x)) is the same as -5000 + 5000
you are performing an action on x, and then performing an inverse to that action
you make it sound complex but really its quite simple.