The article does not mention WinFS or what the "full-featured file system" is. Anyone have a clue if...
...these are one and the same?
...WinFS will be introduced but substantially scaled back?
Either way, it might be 5 years before Microsoft introduces what OSS systems should have in wide use in about a year with ReiserFS and maybe others (guesstimate; corrections appreciated).
What's really surprising is that the first satanist link is the 5th one down. (Though in all honesty, it might also be a reference or a spoof...didn't look!)
The motivations of both groups are left out of your examples. It's as if they both are borred and didn't have a care in the world.
CC's life drove him to promote his idea and to secure funding. The idea that there was a western passage to India and the Far East (Japan, China,...) wasn't new or too strange even at the time. People had tried it many times before and failed (and some suceeded, though that is another research project).
Chances are, if he didn't go West, he would have struck out on an alternate shipping route...and in short order, others would have attempted the trip West.
In the case of the hanging around in trees group, maybe the trees were going away? The crazy idea would have been to insist on staying in the trees, not leaving them (even if for a short while).
In the case of the Moon or Mars, if the risk is worth it to a group or individual the risk will be taken. Since many people and groups are comfortable enough to be borred, chances are that there will not be a serious effort to put people on either world. If that changes, or if there are groups that are currently motivated, I'd expect that the situation to change. Till then, it's going to be a waste of money since nobody cares much about the outcome beyond a week or two of excitement. Remember the public apathy that the last couple Apollo missions encountered and what happened to the funding for future missions.
People like to explore. Many people died colonizing the Americas, but we kept at it until it stuck. The moon is just the next step in this process. We, as humans, want to learn and explore. We want to go to the moon and to Mars. Because we want to we will eventually.
All we have to do is;
Find heathen moon "people" or convince some televangelist that there ARE heathen moon people (they'll believe anything anyway, or will for a buck).
Make up stories about cities or mountains of gold or platinum
...and we'll have colonies on the moon in a decade.
(Seriously, though, where are the millions of willing and lonely green or blue women -- the kind that Kirk kept shagging? If they ain't there, someone should whip them up in a vat and ship them there! Now that I look at it, a few mountains on the moon are obviously made of some precious metal....)
I've just completed a contract where I was given the task of documenting a system that had already been installed. No big deal; I expect to do it.
The first draft was 60+ pages, and along with describing how to maintain the sytem it also included notes on defects and poor practices that the sysadmins should address (there were quite a few ).
The target audience for the document was someone with roughly my own skills who simply did not have the program-specific knowledge that I have. The document even encouraged the reader to improvise and adapt the notes; this was only one set of examples of how to do things and surely not the best or only way.
Well, shortly before submitting the document I was given someone who not only wasn't my peer, they shouldn't have even had a job doing anything with computers at all. We're talking a programer who said...
"I use the mouse to copy text."
"What's Ctrl-C? Sounds like too much trouble."
"Notepad is a very good editor."
"It's not possible to compare 2 files".
...I could go on for hours, though I'll spare you any more brain dammage.
The new instruction was that I needed to make sure this person could use the document I was writing. We're talking "Take a finger, reach around, stop when it gets moist" simplicity here.
In the mean time, I was to also train this person to do exactly what I did -- in 1 month -- though it took me about 5 years to learn the basics myself (and I've been doing it for 15 years!).
I've encountered both unreasonable and impossible tasks before, so I attacked this one with the same vigor. I spent most of the month training -- smiling -- and going away as often as possible to jump up and down in deep frustration.
Because _this_person_ was my real audience, I threw out most of the original document, and re-wrote it with such gems as "here is how to create a desktop link" and "follow procedures, even if you think you don't have to" (this I've heard was ignored immediately -- 'too much trouble; I don't need to do all that').
The only thing this person had was an H1B visa...and I'm guessing that they were both cheap and loyal (due to the threat of being deported).
...though, it's just as likely a marketing ploy. After all, Microsoft is not a young company anymore;
"Fellas, we've been looking over your TPS reports, and it's obvious that someone has to deal with the customer -- you know, the folks that aren't us. A few of them have this funny idea they can make software without us. We've decided that someone is you...over here...should do something, something important and somehow sensitive. You are sensitive, aren't you? Do something with this 'hip' [fingers quoting in air] 'baloaagging' [fingers in air again] we've heard about and show the human side of us, OK? Thanks! Is Tuesday too soon?"
My guess is that they'll still be diamonds, but that they'll be "designer" gems. So even though a raw 1-carat stone might only cost $100, the ones you'll see at jewelry stores will be designed and/or cut by someone with a French name, and they'll still cost $1000 or more.
Agreed. Along those lines I can see a good market for 'glowing' designer diamonds...more unique, visible, thus higher status.
I told a young woman that diamonds are going to become cheap over the next 10 years. She didn't like that at all.
When I pointed out that it was OK that there would no doubt be something that is as expensive as diamonds and would take the place of them, she was greatly relieved.
Yeah, it's what they look like -- not the fact they cost $1-10K and can be sold easily. Yep, strictly the looks. Sure it is!
My custom 2.6.x kernels work well with Fedora test 1. The only thing I really did was;
Update all the user space packages as decribed in the kernel README.
Grab the.config file for one of the Fedora binary 2.6.x kernels (in/boot if it is installed, the RPM if not).
Copy it to the 2.6.x kernel source directory -- where ever you put it -- and run "make oldconfig".
Tweak and modify the kernel as you see fit. Otherwise, compile as-is.
That said, there are customized parts of the official Fedora Linux kernels, so some of the.config options will be tossed out during "make oldconfig". Look for error messages to see what you'll be missing.
I don't encounter those problems. Sure, to my shame I've done dumb things that have locked the system (example: using cat on some things in/proc is a BAD idea). I've also had buggy drivers that crash X when running games full screen (fixed drivers seem to work fine). In a few cases (pre-2.6 kernel) I've even had tasks running that swamp the CPU and it takes minutes to regain control by ctrl-alt-F1 and killing the process. X, though, still plugs along once the app is taken out of the picture. The KDE 3.2 app killer seems to work well for those instances.
Yeah, but it looks like your OS/2 experience would come in handy when X locks up on you....
X -- specifically XFree86 with KWM -- does act goofy at times, no doubt. Not in the same way as OS/2 though. When an app locks or waits on a resource, the rest of the system chugs along...not so under OS/2 WPS. One workaround for OS/2 (if I remember properly) was to use a breakout switch to wake up the WPS. Had something to do with single threading on the shell even though the rest of OS/2 was multithreaded. (In any case, it's history now.)
For stability, XFree is much nicer; if an app goes down or spins it's wheels looking for a resource, the rest of the system doesn't care one whit.
As an additional Windows-ish feature to handle these apps, KDE 3.2 added an 'app not responding, kill now?' button -- though I don't see that much (IMNSHO it pops up a little too quickly, but I do know what I'm doing).
As was I -- scoffing, I tried it for a competitive analysis that marketing wanted and was hooked within 2 months. It was damn nice for the time, and some features in the WPS would be nice in KDE and/or Gnome if not at the window manager and -- better -- file system level.
The optimist in me is hoping that IBM will stick to its guns this time.
That's the beauty of it. It won't matter in the long run if they do or don't!
There is more support now, and if you remember, it was difficult to get systems with OS/2 preloaded on them.
Nearly impossible. Dell, Gateway, Compaq, and even IBM never preloaded OS/2. Now, we're getting preloads...and even companies like HP and IBM yelling that they are the biggest Linux supporter. Dell brags too...though I'd like them all to shut up and get the goods out there.
Linux has more marketshare, i think, and definetly more mindshare.
Linux isn't being laughed at. OS/2 was only taken seriously at the begining, and quickly became the ugly step child (though technically it was quite nice though prone to crash/lock the UI).
I think Linux will clear the hurdle....
I'm starting to see job listings specifically asking for Linux experience crop up in various places. My OS/2 experience never seemed to be important to anyone.
Why is a roadmap needed anyway? When I want to upgrade my GNU Linux distribution I just go online and download updates. "Roadmaps" are for sheep anyway, they are for Windows users, NOT GNU Linux users.
The list IBM covers is quite handy for training others who think Windows is the beggining and end of what computers can do.
(That said, I would be careful using Webmin -- Step 3 -- as it can cause problems, though as an introduction when a more experienced admin is around it is OK.)
Is this useful for you and me directly? No. Can these texts help us by making conversations with the Windows-obsessed but willing less frustrating? Yes.
Here's the list from the link;
Step 1. Thinking in Linux
The first step to success in Linux is learning to think in Linux. Take what you already know and redirect it to doing things the Linux way.
Step 2. Console crash course
Linux provides great power and flexibility through the console. If it has been a while since you've spent much time at the command prompt, take a little time to reacquaint yourself with this environment by reviewing common commands you'll use all the time.
Step 3. Introduction to Webmin
While it is important to know the nuts and bolts of administration, it is often more convenient to have a tool. Also, a higher-level application makes complex configurations easier to handle. Webmin provides point-and-click configuration for beginning and experienced administrators.
Step 4. User administration
If a system has no users, is it really a system? Learn about the Linux approach to users.
Step 5. Linux logging
Linux makes extensive use of logging. Nothing is hidden from you. Becoming comfortable and familiar with logs will allow you to monitor the health of your system and track activities.
Step 6. Working with file systems
File systems are at the heart of every server. Linux provides a lot of flexibility in its file systems.
Step 7. Networking
Working unconnected is unthinkable in today's world. Linux on the network unleashes its full potential. However, Linux networking looks very different on its face. You'll need to learn some new terminologies and new tools.
Step 8. Backup and recovery
The first line of defense against disaster is a backup of the data. Linux provides different options, some of which are very simple to work with.
Step 9. Installing software
Linux can use prepackaged binary files, or you can compile programs directly from source code. The tools for installing Linux programs are very useful and provide functionality you might not expect.
Except for the fact that you're wrong. MS Office does NOT have anything loading it at startup. This is a FACT. OO.org just has performance issues; admit it!
The computer was digital, it just used relays instead of integrated circuits. It wasn't stuck between relays, it was stuck in a relay.
I stumbled on a copy of the image of the log book, showing the moth taped to it. Quite interesting. Just to be annoying, and somewhat in spirit with this thread, here's a tip;
The previous AC is right; sometimes a decrease in price reduces sales, other times it does nothing to sales, while I agree that most of the time it does increase sales...though not necessarily leading to more overall profit ("Sure we loose $10 per Widget, but we'll make it up in volume!").
I'm only pointing out that most of the software used by any given person (it terms of lines of code) is manufactured software. In fact my understanding of why companies like SAP and Oracle are so successful is that its more cost effective to use manufactured software (with configuration) than it is to custom-create everything -- why reinvent the wheel.
(calculations using SAP as an example)
Come to think of it, this is even more effective when it's OSS; why reinvent the wheel when a perfectly good car is parked there ready to use...or to slap a coat of paint on. Spare engines, gas, and tools are also there -- and you are encouraged to take them.
As for the calculation of code use, I'd stop at lines generated and not put in the user multiplier. The extra work per-user is minor (see below) and explains why some software companies can't make a dime while others have Scrooge Mc Duck-sized money vaults filling up on a daily basis.
Also, I doubt that SAP (or any product for a vertical market) gets that many users per-product. It's also not the bulk of the software installed. The bulk of the code in use is in the form of the OS (if we count per-machine), common 'office' client applications, or a web server and supporting extentions/databases (counting per-user times a variety of web apps and web servers/server farms).
My point is that bad design makes applications even harder to use and thus requires more support, maintenance etc.
From experience the harder software is to use, more people are blocked from using it...thus less support is needed. Make it easy, and support costs will increase. There could be sweet spots in that mix, and for some products this will not be true, though I can't remember many (I worked on ~10 COTS programs, 3 sucessful and of that group one was very very sucessful).
That's a funny story and very true, too. The question is: did total support labor drop and did total adoption and use increase? I'd wager that after that application became easy to install, more people used it and that support per user-hour-of-use actually dropped.
Sales increased (more people could use the tool), support costs increased (more people who shouldn't use tool did -- plus experts had harder more detailed questions), development costs went up (more code to maintain and new demands and requests were placed on the software). All in all, the only thing that went down was the developer-time-per-customer; we went from a staff of 3 programmers to 5 but the sales went up 10-30x (after a while the owners stopped telling us how well things were going).
I may not understand your point on the first one, though feel free to correct me.
#1 Summary of your point (?): On the one hand, if software made in-house is used by 1000 people that's 1000 users of that commercial code...yet on the other you say if your servers have software that represents the bulk of the source that source should count too.
Reply: The calculation for lines of code was never intended to be per-machine, it is "total lines of code written everywhere" = COTS_loc + remaining_loc. Oracle does not create a brand-new code tree for each and every machine it has licenced, yet spreadsheet macros and Access databases tend to be written on a regular basis, typically for well under 1,000 systems. (COTS ~ 'common off-the-shelf software'/sold as a product)
Having worked at both COTS software companies and on custom projects the difference between a product and a project is not trivial. The best contract software shops blend the two, though much custom code is still created and the volumes don't approach Word or even AOL cds let alone Oracle DB server. Moving an entirely in-house project to a product status almost always fails (with some noted exceptions).
The rest of your comments I either agree with in part or in whole.
"Ease of use" - One law I've learned:
As software becomes 'smarter', the difficulty in using the software increases.
You can think of this as related to any complex system.
A hammer is simple, requires some training to use, has a limited set of problems, and skill with a hammer increases over time.
A nail gun is not simple, requires less training for the basics, has a variety of simple and complex problems, and experience matters quite a bit less over time.
That said, I'll take the problems with a nail gun over having to use a hammer almost every time.
Another example: At one of the COTS companies I worked for, our tech support questions on a utility program were almost always one of the same 5 questions. Time to answer each one was about 5 minutes.
The answers were obvious though the tweaking was difficult for a mere mortal. The thought was "if we automate the installation process so that it configures the utility automatically...people won't have to call us as much".
So, after a massive effort of automating the installation and configuration process, those 5 pesky 5 minute questions went away...to be replaced by 20-45 minute questions on a variety of issues we never realized existed.
The 'new' problems always existed, we just did not see them.
I am postmaster and in the IT security department of a fortune 150 Office Supply company.
If that's true, and you work for Staples, can you get me off of your spam lists? I've done everything including calling by phone and all I get is "yes, you will be removed...in a few weeks" -- even after I said that I'd start reporting the spam as spam! (Very much bending over backward here as this is not my normal tactic for UCE.)
After about 6 months of that I gave up and just report the Staples spam along with the rest.
If you work for Office Depot or Office MAX or... no problems! Keep up the good work!
Slashdot Mirror
Either way, it might be 5 years before Microsoft introduces what OSS systems should have in wide use in about a year with ReiserFS and maybe others (guesstimate; corrections appreciated).
What's really surprising is that the first satanist link is the 5th one down. (Though in all honesty, it might also be a reference or a spoof...didn't look!)
CC's life drove him to promote his idea and to secure funding. The idea that there was a western passage to India and the Far East (Japan, China, ...) wasn't new or too strange even at the time. People had tried it many times before and failed (and some suceeded, though that is another research project).
Chances are, if he didn't go West, he would have struck out on an alternate shipping route...and in short order, others would have attempted the trip West.
In the case of the hanging around in trees group, maybe the trees were going away? The crazy idea would have been to insist on staying in the trees, not leaving them (even if for a short while).
In the case of the Moon or Mars, if the risk is worth it to a group or individual the risk will be taken. Since many people and groups are comfortable enough to be borred, chances are that there will not be a serious effort to put people on either world. If that changes, or if there are groups that are currently motivated, I'd expect that the situation to change. Till then, it's going to be a waste of money since nobody cares much about the outcome beyond a week or two of excitement. Remember the public apathy that the last couple Apollo missions encountered and what happened to the funding for future missions.
All we have to do is;
Find heathen moon "people" or convince some televangelist that there ARE heathen moon people (they'll believe anything anyway, or will for a buck).
Make up stories about cities or mountains of gold or platinum
...and we'll have colonies on the moon in a decade.
(Seriously, though, where are the millions of willing and lonely green or blue women -- the kind that Kirk kept shagging? If they ain't there, someone should whip them up in a vat and ship them there! Now that I look at it, a few mountains on the moon are obviously made of some precious metal....)
The first draft was 60+ pages, and along with describing how to maintain the sytem it also included notes on defects and poor practices that the sysadmins should address (there were quite a few ).
The target audience for the document was someone with roughly my own skills who simply did not have the program-specific knowledge that I have. The document even encouraged the reader to improvise and adapt the notes; this was only one set of examples of how to do things and surely not the best or only way.
Well, shortly before submitting the document I was given someone who not only wasn't my peer, they shouldn't have even had a job doing anything with computers at all. We're talking a programer who said...
"I use the mouse to copy text."
"What's Ctrl-C? Sounds like too much trouble."
"Notepad is a very good editor."
"It's not possible to compare 2 files".
...I could go on for hours, though I'll spare you any more brain dammage.
The new instruction was that I needed to make sure this person could use the document I was writing. We're talking "Take a finger, reach around, stop when it gets moist" simplicity here.
In the mean time, I was to also train this person to do exactly what I did -- in 1 month -- though it took me about 5 years to learn the basics myself (and I've been doing it for 15 years!).
I've encountered both unreasonable and impossible tasks before, so I attacked this one with the same vigor. I spent most of the month training -- smiling -- and going away as often as possible to jump up and down in deep frustration.
Because _this_person_ was my real audience, I threw out most of the original document, and re-wrote it with such gems as "here is how to create a desktop link" and "follow procedures, even if you think you don't have to" (this I've heard was ignored immediately -- 'too much trouble; I don't need to do all that').
The only thing this person had was an H1B visa...and I'm guessing that they were both cheap and loyal (due to the threat of being deported).
Who can tell with Microsoft?
Agreed. Along those lines I can see a good market for 'glowing' designer diamonds...more unique, visible, thus higher status.
I told a young woman that diamonds are going to become cheap over the next 10 years. She didn't like that at all.
When I pointed out that it was OK that there would no doubt be something that is as expensive as diamonds and would take the place of them, she was greatly relieved.
Yeah, it's what they look like -- not the fact they cost $1-10K and can be sold easily. Yep, strictly the looks. Sure it is!
"You see, it's our patented water compressor unit over there...well, that, and of course the 10,000 kids used to push the plunger."
Tweak and modify the kernel as you see fit. Otherwise, compile as-is.
That said, there are customized parts of the official Fedora Linux kernels, so some of the .config options will be tossed out during "make oldconfig". Look for error messages to see what you'll be missing.
I don't encounter those problems. Sure, to my shame I've done dumb things that have locked the system (example: using cat on some things in /proc is a BAD idea). I've also had buggy drivers that crash X when running games full screen (fixed drivers seem to work fine). In a few cases (pre-2.6 kernel) I've even had tasks running that swamp the CPU and it takes minutes to regain control by ctrl-alt-F1 and killing the process. X, though, still plugs along once the app is taken out of the picture. The KDE 3.2 app killer seems to work well for those instances.
No journaled FS?
X -- specifically XFree86 with KWM -- does act goofy at times, no doubt. Not in the same way as OS/2 though. When an app locks or waits on a resource, the rest of the system chugs along...not so under OS/2 WPS. One workaround for OS/2 (if I remember properly) was to use a breakout switch to wake up the WPS. Had something to do with single threading on the shell even though the rest of OS/2 was multithreaded. (In any case, it's history now.)
For stability, XFree is much nicer; if an app goes down or spins it's wheels looking for a resource, the rest of the system doesn't care one whit.
As an additional Windows-ish feature to handle these apps, KDE 3.2 added an 'app not responding, kill now?' button -- though I don't see that much (IMNSHO it pops up a little too quickly, but I do know what I'm doing).
It didn't. Now it does. In a few hours, it won't again. It's that dynamic! :)
As was I -- scoffing, I tried it for a competitive analysis that marketing wanted and was hooked within 2 months. It was damn nice for the time, and some features in the WPS would be nice in KDE and/or Gnome if not at the window manager and -- better -- file system level.
That's the beauty of it. It won't matter in the long run if they do or don't!
Nearly impossible. Dell, Gateway, Compaq, and even IBM never preloaded OS/2. Now, we're getting preloads...and even companies like HP and IBM yelling that they are the biggest Linux supporter. Dell brags too...though I'd like them all to shut up and get the goods out there.
Linux isn't being laughed at. OS/2 was only taken seriously at the begining, and quickly became the ugly step child (though technically it was quite nice though prone to crash/lock the UI).
I'm starting to see job listings specifically asking for Linux experience crop up in various places. My OS/2 experience never seemed to be important to anyone.
The list IBM covers is quite handy for training others who think Windows is the beggining and end of what computers can do.
(That said, I would be careful using Webmin -- Step 3 -- as it can cause problems, though as an introduction when a more experienced admin is around it is OK.)
Is this useful for you and me directly? No. Can these texts help us by making conversations with the Windows-obsessed but willing less frustrating? Yes.
Here's the list from the link;
The first step to success in Linux is learning to think in Linux. Take what you already know and redirect it to doing things the Linux way.
Step 2. Console crash course Linux provides great power and flexibility through the console. If it has been a while since you've spent much time at the command prompt, take a little time to reacquaint yourself with this environment by reviewing common commands you'll use all the time.
Step 3. Introduction to Webmin
While it is important to know the nuts and bolts of administration, it is often more convenient to have a tool. Also, a higher-level application makes complex configurations easier to handle. Webmin provides point-and-click configuration for beginning and experienced administrators.
Step 4. User administration If a system has no users, is it really a system? Learn about the Linux approach to users.
Step 5. Linux logging Linux makes extensive use of logging. Nothing is hidden from you. Becoming comfortable and familiar with logs will allow you to monitor the health of your system and track activities.
Step 6. Working with file systems File systems are at the heart of every server. Linux provides a lot of flexibility in its file systems.
Step 7. Networking
Working unconnected is unthinkable in today's world. Linux on the network unleashes its full potential. However, Linux networking looks very different on its face. You'll need to learn some new terminologies and new tools.
Step 8. Backup and recovery
The first line of defense against disaster is a backup of the data. Linux provides different options, some of which are very simple to work with.
Step 9. Installing software
Linux can use prepackaged binary files, or you can compile programs directly from source code. The tools for installing Linux programs are very useful and provide functionality you might not expect.
Scared to take a look?
Are you sure?
Ever used this?
I stumbled on a copy of the image of the log book, showing the moth taped to it. Quite interesting. Just to be annoying, and somewhat in spirit with this thread, here's a tip;
If you can't figure that out, the image probably won't make much sense to you either.
The previous AC is right; sometimes a decrease in price reduces sales, other times it does nothing to sales, while I agree that most of the time it does increase sales...though not necessarily leading to more overall profit ("Sure we loose $10 per Widget, but we'll make it up in volume!").
(calculations using SAP as an example)
Come to think of it, this is even more effective when it's OSS; why reinvent the wheel when a perfectly good car is parked there ready to use...or to slap a coat of paint on. Spare engines, gas, and tools are also there -- and you are encouraged to take them.
As for the calculation of code use, I'd stop at lines generated and not put in the user multiplier. The extra work per-user is minor (see below) and explains why some software companies can't make a dime while others have Scrooge Mc Duck-sized money vaults filling up on a daily basis.
Also, I doubt that SAP (or any product for a vertical market) gets that many users per-product. It's also not the bulk of the software installed. The bulk of the code in use is in the form of the OS (if we count per-machine), common 'office' client applications, or a web server and supporting extentions/databases (counting per-user times a variety of web apps and web servers/server farms).
From experience the harder software is to use, more people are blocked from using it...thus less support is needed. Make it easy, and support costs will increase. There could be sweet spots in that mix, and for some products this will not be true, though I can't remember many (I worked on ~10 COTS programs, 3 sucessful and of that group one was very very sucessful).
Sales increased (more people could use the tool), support costs increased (more people who shouldn't use tool did -- plus experts had harder more detailed questions), development costs went up (more code to maintain and new demands and requests were placed on the software). All in all, the only thing that went down was the developer-time-per-customer; we went from a staff of 3 programmers to 5 but the sales went up 10-30x (after a while the owners stopped telling us how well things were going).
No, seriously, can you take my whole domain off of your lists?
#1 Summary of your point (?): On the one hand, if software made in-house is used by 1000 people that's 1000 users of that commercial code...yet on the other you say if your servers have software that represents the bulk of the source that source should count too.
Reply: The calculation for lines of code was never intended to be per-machine, it is "total lines of code written everywhere" = COTS_loc + remaining_loc. Oracle does not create a brand-new code tree for each and every machine it has licenced, yet spreadsheet macros and Access databases tend to be written on a regular basis, typically for well under 1,000 systems. (COTS ~ 'common off-the-shelf software'/sold as a product)
Having worked at both COTS software companies and on custom projects the difference between a product and a project is not trivial. The best contract software shops blend the two, though much custom code is still created and the volumes don't approach Word or even AOL cds let alone Oracle DB server. Moving an entirely in-house project to a product status almost always fails (with some noted exceptions).
The rest of your comments I either agree with in part or in whole.
"Ease of use" - One law I've learned:
You can think of this as related to any complex system.
A hammer is simple, requires some training to use, has a limited set of problems, and skill with a hammer increases over time.
A nail gun is not simple, requires less training for the basics, has a variety of simple and complex problems, and experience matters quite a bit less over time.
That said, I'll take the problems with a nail gun over having to use a hammer almost every time.
Another example: At one of the COTS companies I worked for, our tech support questions on a utility program were almost always one of the same 5 questions. Time to answer each one was about 5 minutes.
The answers were obvious though the tweaking was difficult for a mere mortal. The thought was "if we automate the installation process so that it configures the utility automatically...people won't have to call us as much".
So, after a massive effort of automating the installation and configuration process, those 5 pesky 5 minute questions went away...to be replaced by 20-45 minute questions on a variety of issues we never realized existed.
The 'new' problems always existed, we just did not see them.
If that's true, and you work for Staples, can you get me off of your spam lists? I've done everything including calling by phone and all I get is "yes, you will be removed...in a few weeks" -- even after I said that I'd start reporting the spam as spam! (Very much bending over backward here as this is not my normal tactic for UCE.)
After about 6 months of that I gave up and just report the Staples spam along with the rest.
If you work for Office Depot or Office MAX or ... no problems! Keep up the good work!