Slashdot Mirror
Ask About Proprietary vs. Open Source Code Quality
Scott Trappe is CEO of Reasoning, a company that has gained a certain amount of noteriety (and a Slashdot mention) by running its Ilumna automated inspection service on several versions of TCP/IP -- and concluding that the Linux version has fewer bugs than most proprietary ones. Why is this? Let's ask Scott, and also ask him any other question you can think of about software quality and how to achieve it since, after all, that's his business. We'll send him 10 of the highest-moderated questions and post his answers when we get them back.
No. The Linux TCP/IP stack was written from the spec mainly by Alan while he was at Swansea. Haven't you seen the credit to SUCS in your Linux boot-up? That's the problem with graphical splash screens...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
People like Terry Lambert pop up often with quasi-benchmarks taken from personal experience.
Check out http://news.gw.com/freebsd.arch/9169 for a detailed way to get 1.6 million simultaneous connections in FreeBSD, a number that Linux simply can't match.
Check out http://linuxpr.com/releases/5611.html for IBM's simultaneous connection limit:
1.6 million compared to 6,900. To be fair, one is excessively tuned, but despite that, it's a huge difference.
Mooniacs for iOS and Android
in spite of sounding like a troll i agree with you. the whole open source thing is great while you're living in your folks basement, but once you've got a roof to keep over your head and mouths to feed it becomes a waste of time. i mean if you want to code in your spare time, then fine, use it to start your own company. you can try to right all of the "wrongs" you percieve in the industy. If technically superior code can kill the competition then a programmer (with business sense) at the head of a multinational corp would be a dangerous thing to those run by business men and bean counters.
i wrote a massive library from scratch in C that has been used to build a commercial-grade data transformation product. it is 100% component-oriented, the beginnings of a software assembly line. there have been 3 bugs found in 3 years. my method: i don't tolerate bugs in my code. period. i scour the code over and over, reading it line by line with my finger on the monitor. it's idiotic but man does it work. i dunno if it would work for other people, but this would be the ultimate closed-source environment. of course i'm taking my own advice and founding a company on it.
Sure, because it's well known that commercial software vendors never fix serious vulnerabilities as fast as the open source community. Particularly ones like Apple, for example, who have fixed several vulnerabilities in MacOS X way before the equivalent Linux patches were released. Since you like sendmail so much, I suggest you check how fast the major commercial *nix vendors released their patches compared to the open source world, and get back to us.
Now please pick up your ill-informed pro-OS FUD and go away.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Actually, Linux used to use the BSD TCP/IP stack. Linus was fine with it. But Alan was tired of the ragging he used to get at LUGs.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
The following are closed-source softwares, bug-free up to my knowledge, never crash, intuitive, nice interface, easy-to-install, easy-to-learn, easy-to-use and very nice to work with it:
e c Easy CD Creator
/s/b and a regexp or manually open all files from each sub-dir )
Borland C++ Builder 5.x
Vandyke Secure CRT (Doesn't have term bug) =P
Vandyke Secure FX
EditPlus
CuteFTP
CuteHTML
LViewPro (Much easier than Photoshop)
mIRC
Trillian
WinAmp
WinZip
Adapt
Bitware Fax
Visual ASM
HyperDX
WinICE
EAGLE Layout Editor
Toad for Oracle
What's your list?
Not mentionning all the great games on Windows!
Not mentionning Microsoft 'good' products:
MS Paint
MS Word
MS Excel
MS PowerPoint
MS Age of Empire II
MS Age of Methology
MS Visual C++ when you don't use MFC.
Let me know when those software WILL be as good, user-friendly, bug-free, usable like the one on Windows.
Got to admit KDE is getting there, but not yet.
Every stupid questions turns out like how yea Micro$oft sux, Windows sux, Linux Rulez, OpenOffice is so good and free.
For the *nix bashing part:
gdb is crapt
man pages are crapt
vi sux
emacs better than vi but really sux
nedit is freaking slow
OpenOffice Word, AbiWord don't equivalent MS Word
OpenOffice Calc IS FAR FROM USABLE compare to Excel
The good part:
KDE is pretty good
pico/nano is not bad.
Kate is probably ok.
After a long day of hacking in vi/emacs/pico/nano/gdb on a f*cking term, man you are happy when you get back to home hacking in some nice EditPlus or with MSVC full debugger!
For those who are so good at vi/emacs, how much time does it takes let say to open a GPL/LGPL/BSD source tree with directory, to remove the License
header notice from all files in all subdirectories
(Open all files recursively => easy with CuteHTML, with EditPlus create a project file
with a dir
(select, CTRL-C, CTRL-H, CTRL-V, replace by a token -LICENSE- ), and save it (Save all),
then send it to a line printer (Print all...) then undo the search and replace (CTRL-H...) and save it (Save all).
Tool used: CuteHTML or EditPlus
Good luck! =P
None of my vi/emacs friend where able to do it easilly and as fast as me, but my grandma can do it as fast as me.
Have fun freaks!
- Usability Hacker: Someone who don't waste time with stupid tools without religious faith to get the job done faster, easier and better than any other hacker.
It is true that MS does not pro-actively disclose the details of the file formats they introduce, it is also true they modifying standard formats (expand), but to say that they do that with the sole purpose of reducing compatability and maintainging their market share is something that should not be generalized.
As is frequently pointed out, in some cases their software is just overall better than others.
--[rosso bright]--