I believe that the title is correct and appropriate because Microsoft's generic approach is to leave no options to customers other than to do it the Microsoft way with Microsoft proprietary solutions without regard for the relative quality of the Microsoft solution
The fully expanded version of the title would be Making Fingers Work With Microsft-Touch-Screen (TM). Since the likely presumption is that all are most touch screens will be driven by Microsoft software the original title works well. The word combination "touch screen" or something even more generic will shortly be a Microsoft proprietary name/phrase/word combination.
This is Linux anti-marketing by a classic Microsoft tactic of feeding and creating confusion about any functionality that they can't compete with. In this case they are cultivating the confusion about the meaning of free software. With articles like this Microsoft takes control of the dictionary and changes the discussion to something self serving and otherwise irrelevant.
Confusing the use of names and concepts and capturing common words as a deliberate marketing strategy runs deep at Microsoft. The most basic example is using the word "windows" as a proprietary product name. A more involved effort is the effort to destroy the distinction between file formats, applications, and operating systems. This generates marketing FUD in that many people feel that in order to be able to work with others they have to use Microsoft applicaitons on Microsoft machines.
Its been on my desktop for almost a decade. The cover art keeps getting better and better so its decorative. Some day I'll install it on my computer again.
When you are a member of the vast majority then you are, by some definitions, not a member of a cult. There is a Microsoft cult that constitutes a small minority of Microsoft users but that dwarfs the Mac and Linux cult membership. The Microsoft fan club is even bigger.
Bear in mind that I would say similar things to what I say below about Linux and Mac cult members. Everyone already knows these things about Linux and Mac cult members but I thought that it might be useful to list some of them with specifics as they apply to the case of Microsoft cult membership since many seem to be oblivious to the ugly reality of Microsoft cultdom. Maybe its like the air we breath. In any case if you are a Microsoft fan club member or cult member then don't be too offended. Just rewrite one of your favorite anti-Linux or anti-Mac fanboy rants and post it in response. Better yet just take the paragraphs below and change the names where appropriate.
There are a number of indicators that make it possible to detect Microsoft core cult members with a fair amount of accuracy. When someone is pointing out that someone else is a, Linux geek-nerd, a Mac fan-boy, a Mac snob, a Mac coolaid drinker, or blinded by the Steve Jobs reality-distortion-field etc. its likely that the person pointing it out is a rabid Microsoft cult member. Some other indicators are a.) pointing out that Bill Gates gratuitously personalized public display of charity is reason for brand loyalty, b.) hatred of Steve Jobs, c.) assertions that Bill Gates and Microsoft made inexpensive (the correct word is cheap) computing available to the masses, d.) assertions that Microsoft is an innovator, e.) assertions and arguments to the effect that Windows is the safest operating system out there, f.) assertions that periodic reinstallation of Windows is not a problem, g.) remarks such as "I don't know what people are complaining about I never have any problems with Windows", or "I never have any problems with Word its a great product". There are many more indicators but you get the general idea. These are all things that are either orthogonal to reality or have nothing to do with the of the actual product and are therefor indicative of other factors that are not discussable in a rational dialog. Three of these indicators and you've got your hands on the genuine item: Pays for and eats Microsoft excrement with gratitude and a smile. At that point you can just chalk the interaction up to an entertaining experience. If you get four or more of these indicators then try to change the subject while making seemingly random positional adjustments in the direction of the door.
Most people don't know enough about computer technology to make a good choice on their own so they go with the majority just be safe. If they see someone doing or using something different then it can be unsettling or even threatening. The more insecure cases become agressive and form the jihadic core of the Microsoft fan club.
There is a critical market share or tipping point for Mac OS or Linux (probably significantly less than 25% ) at which point the Microsoft fan club members and the less insecure Microsoft cult members would convert in droves.
With this change we can be fairly certain that lots of money has changed hands above and below the table. The original idea was to give more people with less resources access to computers. The idea that those disadvantaged people need and demand access to Microsoft Office isn't even ludicrous.
Maybe archeologists will soon find the remains of the B-ark that brought our ancestors here and we can salvage some of the necessary technology to build a new one.
On the other hand something really bothers me about settling another planet with rejects of descendents of B-arkers. We also have to remember the fate of those that our ancestors left behind.
I believe that the original erroneous criteria for B-ark passenger selection was that the person appeared to be useless. Because the end results were catastrophic and because we are B-ark descendants we need to come up with different selection criteria or at least be more careful in applying the original criteria. If this ends up qualifying everyone on the planet then we don't need to build the ark.
A more useful criterion might have something to do with a genetically based predisposition toward control of others. But then again we might not need to build the ark because as in the previous case we all qualify.
Maybe for the sake of the other remaining life forms on this planet we should just build the stupid ark and get out of here before we finish off the worthwhile life forms.
Microsoft is not just any old self serving company. There is a full spectrum of bad corporate behavior and Microsoft is way over toward the end where market control by indirect means (political and otherwise) dominates over competitive service and products. Additionally the service that they are controlling is vital to national security and indirectly to an increasing number of quality-of-life services.
Unfortunately many would argue that their products and services are superior. As Microsoft reaches deeper and deeper into our pockets and lives many more will be inclined to argue on Microsoft's behalf rather than admit what they have allowed Microsoft to do to them.
The ultimate solution is as you indicate: If at all possible don't buy their products. It seems to be the only remaining type of voting that almost matters. Unfortunately, at this point in time, the file formats for Microsoft products are not sufficiently readable by any other product to make them a reliable substitute in today's business environment. Open Office is a great product but the file format issue will eventually kill it unless these battles can be won.
As I read your comments your substantive complaint about Macs is summarized in these two sentences. "Those POS machines were nearly impossible to operate reliably for over 6 months." and "Hearing Extents B Tree still gives me the willies."
Please elaborate so that everyone understands exactly how bad this is. In particular, can you explain what you mean by "impossible to operate reliably for over 6 months" and exactly how the alternatives were better in this regard ? What does "Extents B Tree" mean ?
(sarcasm) So am I confused or is the big idea of this article that we all need to get our heads together and figure out how to help poor old Microsoft achieve market dominance in yet another market with yet another mediocre product so that we are all left with no choice but that mediocre product with no prospects for improvement because there is no longer any competition and because Microsoft therefor doesn't give a good goddam about customer service any longer. Well now, for some peculiar reason I'm having problems getting excited about this even though I know that poor old Microsoft is helpless and needy and all that. Apparently I'm just a mean spirited badass because I just can't get into the concept.
(seriously)
Maybe if they gave me back my money for the defective MS Office piece of crap that I have no choice but to use at considerable personal cost I would think more kindly of them in their pits of Zune despair. As it is I hope they spend $100 billion on it and choke to death on shit-brown plastic.
There are excellent services and products already available at decent prices. What is MS offering that's really new that people really care about and are willing to pay for. It seems like all they need to do is offer something better for less money even if it is just a coolness factor or whatever it is that people want and are willing to pay for. If this weren't just some ego-control-dominance-bendover issue for Microsoft rather than about real customer service then they could just fucking figure it out and do what needs to be done. But that's not whats happening. They want control of this market but are clueless about how to get it other than to lose money for a half decade in order to wear down opposition and achieve control of the market with a product that not only causes impotence in otherwise fertile humans but actually causes their genitals to dry up and fall off.
If anyone is so self destructive as to want to actively support Microsoft to their own manifest personal detriment and to the detriment of everyone else then why don't they just go for broke and, for no apparent reason, send money to Exxon instead of trying to help Microsoft (tears of hysterical laughter here). If you want the ultimate bend-over experience then Exxons the place to send your money. Microsoft is minor league in that regard although they do aspire.
(sarcasm) So the point of this article is: We need to figure out how to help Microsoft achieve market dominance in yet another market with yet another mediocre product so that we are all be left with no choice but that mediocre product. Hmmm. Now there's something to get excited about. (seriously) why don't they just offer something better for less money. Oh duh. Stupid me. We're talking about computer related shit and Microsoft. Sorry I temporarily lost my mind.
Is our planet worth colonizing by life forms that are the most likely to develop the technology necessary to colonize the galaxy ? Our planet may be incapable of evolving and/or efficiently supporting forms of life with the levels of complexity that is more common in the universe. Planets in general may not be the best place for the most complex life forms to colonize even if planets rather than stars are the points of origin for the more complex forms of life.
Our intellects are physically limited by the time frame and environment for the evolutionary process from which we emerged. A detail of the final result is that our science and math are limited to the one dimensional medium of language-based rationality No doubt, it has served us well but the limitations may be more significant that we would like and much more significant than we have begun to appreciate in the last century or so. Communication via temporally sequenced character strings may seem so limiting as to be pointless to some.
The "Fermi paradox" is about our sense of self importance. If I were another life form, either on or off of this planet, how would I deal with creatures of our limitation and arrogance ?
1. Microsoft is probably, as they say, investing considerable effort/expense to figure out what customers want in a document format and that's probably a good thing.
2. Since their stock is publicly traded, Microsoft has some responsibility to make a profit on their investment in document format research.
3. Microsoft's history of success consists largely of establishing de facto proprietary standards and parlaying effective control of those standards into enormous profit (congratulations to them and may we all be so successful in life)
In this context the letter from Microsoft to IBM is a "blast" of humor.
Believe it or not. I have Phd in Physics from a kickass graduate physics department. I did some graduate work on string charge exchange.
BTW You don't need to have a Phd in Physics to understand why string theory has been a bad thing for physics. Just read a good basic text on the philosophy and history of physics then read what the leading proponents of string theory have been saying for a long time now and then think about it for yourself. There are also a couple of recent books written by reputable physicists on the subject of the negative effects of string mania. They shouldn't be hard to find. String theory might be a viable theory someday but taken in context it has been a destructive force in physics.
Hatred lowers a persons effective intellectual capacity no matter how good their brain is.
It doesn't need further confirmation. It has successfully generated many Phd's
On a more serious note: Extra dimensions were observed long before string theory was a fad. Just like all of its predecessors it will never be more than a theory. The question is : is it a useful theory that gets us leverage on our world and a leg up on the next useful theory. Physical theories can be tested or disproven but never proven.
no no no you iggorant fool
The strings are dangling into the hole and through the process
of reverse obfusification the angular momentus is transparently
reversified to nullify the boolshiteicus component according to the theory of
string-a-lingus-bodingus.
All viable physical theories predict extra dimensions because as a matter of fact we've observed extra dimensions for a long time now. Long before the string religion began we knew about electric charge and other internal quantum numbers.
The sky is blue and my penis gets stiff when I look at high quality porn. Are those validation of string theory too or should I look to an even higher level theory/religion like intelligent design ?
I understand what you are saying, its a really good point. I'd never thought about it that way and I almost completely agree.
But now consider an imaginary scenario and tell me if it sounds like its almost hard: The deadline is a week away, the software is still behaving badly, and you've found a bug in the development tools that makes it ten times harder to find some kinds of bugs in your application. Its too late to switch tools and you are having to take risks by choosing between different testing strategies that may or may not pan out in time. Your boss is breathing down your neck to know if execution speed is up when the moron should be worried about whether or not the code will execute correctly at all. He's promised the moon to the customer and refused to listen to you when you tried to explain that the required level of effort was way above what he originally committed to. You have been working unpaid hours evenings and weekends week after week to make up the difference between reality and his stupid original estimate so that you don't get fired or demoted. Your kids would ask you for some cool toys ( and you would tell them yes they could have them if you still had a job at the end of the week ) if they were ever awake when you got home and if they could recognize you with that vampire look acquired after not having seen the sun for months. D-day arrives and the code isn't ready. Your boss expresses his disappointment in you in front of your coworkers who are snickering. If you weren't too blasted out of your mind from shear exhaustion and fear of losing your job you would rip his limbs off and bludgeon your fellow employees into masses of red pulp.
Of course I just described a completely imaginary situation. No real programmer deals with anything remotely like this kind of stress, at least not for more than a month or two preceding a myocardial infarction. Most programmers just code for fun and profit in a stress free environment. So I guess that you are right in the final analysis.
Re:Read a real book on software engineering
on
Why Software is Hard
·
· Score: 1
I think that you are right on. Many of the reasons for software failure and failure of software product development projects are well understood and can be found in good textbooks.
A day will come when software product manufacturers are held responsible and accountable for serious loss, injury or death caused by software failure. When that happens software engineering will become a respected discipline that encompasses programming rather than being subsumed by it. We'll also hear a lot less confused babble masquerading as insightful wisdom about software development.
There are a growing number of medical and military software applications for which putting a disclaimer in a EULA doesn't cover it (Referring survivors to a EULA after a software failure let an ICBM through wouldn't be considered good humor).
Its obvious to me can't read with comprehension or think with clarity.
I suppose its the only way to maintain that much lack of integrity with a decent self image.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe that the title is correct and appropriate because
Microsoft's generic approach is to leave no options to customers other than to do it the Microsoft
way with Microsoft proprietary solutions without regard for the
relative quality of the Microsoft solution
The fully expanded version of the title would be Making Fingers Work With Microsft-Touch-Screen (TM).
Since the likely presumption is that all are most touch screens will be driven by Microsoft
software the original title works well.
The word combination "touch screen" or something even more generic will shortly be a
Microsoft proprietary name/phrase/word combination.
This is Linux anti-marketing by a classic Microsoft tactic
of feeding and creating confusion about any functionality that
they can't compete with. In this case
they are cultivating the confusion about the meaning of free software.
With articles like this Microsoft takes control of the dictionary and
changes the discussion to something self serving and otherwise
irrelevant.
Confusing the use of names and concepts and capturing common
words as a deliberate marketing strategy runs deep at Microsoft. The most basic
example is using the word "windows" as a proprietary product name.
A more involved effort is the effort to destroy the distinction
between file formats, applications, and operating systems.
This generates marketing FUD in that many people
feel that in order to be able to work with
others they have to use Microsoft applicaitons on Microsoft machines.
its just an overpriced MP3 player
I just asked a bunch of people about it and its like
wow. it has no future
Its been on my desktop for almost a decade. The cover art keeps getting
better and better so its decorative. Some day I'll install it on my computer
again.
When you are a member of the vast majority then you are, by some definitions, not
a member of a cult. There is a Microsoft cult that constitutes a small
minority of Microsoft users but that dwarfs the Mac and Linux cult membership.
The Microsoft fan club is even bigger.
Bear in mind that I would say similar things to what I say below about Linux and Mac cult members.
Everyone already knows these things about Linux and Mac cult members but I thought that it might
be useful to list some of them with specifics as they apply to the case of Microsoft cult
membership since many seem to be oblivious to the ugly reality of Microsoft cultdom.
Maybe its like the air we breath. In any case if you are a Microsoft
fan club member or cult member then don't be too offended. Just rewrite one of your
favorite anti-Linux or anti-Mac fanboy rants and post it in response. Better yet just take the paragraphs below
and change the names where appropriate.
There are a number of indicators that make it possible to detect Microsoft
core cult members with a fair amount of accuracy.
When someone is pointing out that someone else
is a, Linux geek-nerd, a Mac fan-boy, a Mac snob, a Mac coolaid drinker, or blinded by the
Steve Jobs reality-distortion-field etc. its likely that the
person pointing it out is a rabid Microsoft cult member.
Some other indicators are a.) pointing out that Bill Gates gratuitously personalized public display of charity
is reason for brand loyalty, b.) hatred of Steve Jobs, c.) assertions
that Bill Gates and Microsoft made inexpensive (the correct word is cheap) computing available to the masses,
d.) assertions that Microsoft is an innovator, e.) assertions and arguments to the effect that Windows is the
safest operating system out there, f.) assertions that periodic
reinstallation of Windows is not a problem, g.) remarks such as "I don't know what
people are complaining about I never have any problems with Windows", or
"I never have any problems with Word its a great product". There are many
more indicators but you get the general idea. These are all things that are
either orthogonal to reality or have nothing to do with the
of the actual product and are therefor indicative of other factors that are not
discussable in a rational dialog. Three of these indicators and you've got your
hands on the genuine item: Pays for and eats Microsoft excrement with gratitude and a smile.
At that point you can just chalk the interaction up to an entertaining experience.
If you get four or more of these indicators then try to change the subject while making
seemingly random positional adjustments in the direction of the door.
Most people don't know enough about computer technology to make
a good choice on their own so they go with the majority just be safe. If they see
someone doing or using something different then it can be
unsettling or even threatening. The more insecure cases become agressive and
form the jihadic core of the Microsoft fan club.
There is a critical market share or tipping point for Mac OS or Linux
(probably significantly less than 25% ) at which point the Microsoft fan club members and the less insecure
Microsoft cult members would convert in droves.
With this change we can be fairly certain that lots of money has changed hands above and below the table.
The original idea was to give more people with less resources access to computers.
The idea that those disadvantaged people need and demand access to Microsoft Office isn't even ludicrous.
Maybe archeologists will soon find the remains of the B-ark that brought our ancestors here
and we can salvage some of the necessary technology to build a new one.
On the other hand something really bothers me about settling another planet with rejects of descendents
of B-arkers. We also have to remember the fate of those that our ancestors left behind.
I believe that the original erroneous criteria for B-ark passenger selection was that the person appeared to be useless.
Because the end results were catastrophic and because we are B-ark descendants we need
to come up with different selection criteria or at least be more careful in applying the original criteria.
If this ends up qualifying everyone on the planet then we don't need to build the ark.
A more useful criterion might have something to do with a genetically based predisposition toward control of others.
But then again we might not need to build the ark because as in the previous case we all qualify.
Maybe for the sake of the other remaining life forms on this planet we should just build the stupid ark and get out
of here before we finish off the worthwhile life forms.
So you are expecting Microsoft to protect your interests.
This is lamest way I've ever heard of to go after a Darwin award.
Microsoft is not just any old self serving company. There is a full spectrum of bad corporate behavior and
Microsoft is way over toward the end where market control by indirect means (political and otherwise)
dominates over competitive service and products. Additionally the service that they are controlling is vital
to national security and indirectly to an increasing number of quality-of-life services.
Unfortunately many would argue that their products and services are superior. As Microsoft reaches deeper
and deeper into our pockets and lives many more will be inclined to argue on Microsoft's behalf rather than admit what
they have allowed Microsoft to do to them.
The ultimate solution is as you indicate: If at all possible don't buy their products. It seems to be the
only remaining type of voting that almost matters. Unfortunately, at this point in time,
the file formats for Microsoft products are not sufficiently readable by any other product to make
them a reliable substitute in today's business environment. Open Office is a great product but
the file format issue will eventually kill it unless these battles can be won.
"slammed open source software for being useless and buggy."
Heinous!
Evil bastards.
As I read your comments your substantive complaint about Macs is summarized in these two sentences.
"Those POS machines were nearly impossible to operate reliably for over 6 months."
and
"Hearing Extents B Tree still gives me the willies."
Please elaborate so that everyone understands exactly how bad this is.
In particular, can you explain what you mean by "impossible to operate reliably for over 6 months"
and exactly how the alternatives were better in this regard ?
What does "Extents B Tree" mean ?
(sarcasm)
So am I confused or is the big idea of this article
that we all need to get our heads together and
figure out how to help poor old Microsoft
achieve market dominance in yet another market
with yet another mediocre product so that we are all left
with no choice but that mediocre product with no prospects
for improvement because there is no longer any competition and
because Microsoft therefor doesn't give a good goddam about
customer service any longer.
Well now, for some peculiar reason I'm having problems getting
excited about this even though
I know that poor old Microsoft is helpless and needy and all that.
Apparently I'm just a mean spirited badass because I just can't get into
the concept.
(seriously)
Maybe if they gave me back my money for the defective MS Office
piece of crap that I have no choice but to use at considerable personal cost
I would think more kindly of them in their pits of Zune despair. As it is I hope they spend $100 billion
on it and choke to death on shit-brown plastic.
There are excellent services and products already available at decent prices.
What is MS offering that's really new that people really care about
and are willing to pay for. It seems like all they need to do is offer something
better for less money even if it is just a coolness factor or whatever it is
that people want and are willing to pay for.
If this weren't just some ego-control-dominance-bendover
issue for Microsoft rather than about real customer service
then they could just fucking figure it out and do what
needs to be done. But that's not whats happening. They want control of this market
but are clueless about how to get it other than to lose money for a half decade
in order to wear down opposition and achieve control of the market with a product
that not only causes impotence in otherwise fertile humans but actually causes their genitals
to dry up and fall off.
If anyone is so self destructive as to want to actively support Microsoft to their own
manifest personal detriment and to the detriment of everyone else then why don't they just
go for broke and, for no apparent reason, send money to Exxon instead of trying to help Microsoft
(tears of hysterical laughter here). If you want the ultimate bend-over experience
then Exxons the place to send your money. Microsoft is minor league in that regard although
they do aspire.
(sarcasm)
So the point of this article is:
We need to figure out how to help Microsoft
achieve market dominance in yet another market
with yet another mediocre product so that we are all be left
with no choice but that mediocre product. Hmmm. Now there's
something to get excited about.
(seriously)
why don't they just offer something better for less money.
Oh duh. Stupid me. We're talking about computer related
shit and Microsoft. Sorry I temporarily lost my mind.
It makes sense that the best locks were made by
the company that makes locks for people who
are compelled to live in crime ridden neighborhoods.
Is our planet worth colonizing by life forms that are the most likely to develop the
technology necessary to colonize the galaxy ? Our planet
may be incapable of evolving and/or efficiently supporting forms of life with the levels of complexity that is more
common in the universe. Planets in general may not be the best place for the most complex life forms to colonize
even if planets rather than stars are the points of origin for the more complex forms of life.
Our intellects are physically limited by the time frame and environment
for the evolutionary process from which we emerged. A detail of the final result is that
our science and math are limited to the one dimensional medium of language-based rationality
No doubt, it has served us well but the limitations may be more significant
that we would like and much more significant than we have begun to appreciate in the last century or so.
Communication via temporally sequenced character strings may seem so limiting as to be
pointless to some.
The "Fermi paradox" is about our sense of self importance.
If I were another life form, either on or off of this planet,
how would I deal with creatures of our limitation and arrogance ?
1. Microsoft is probably, as they say, investing considerable effort/expense to figure out what
customers want in a document format and that's probably a good thing.
2. Since their stock is publicly traded, Microsoft has some responsibility to
make a profit on their investment in document format research.
3. Microsoft's history of success consists largely of establishing de facto proprietary standards
and parlaying effective control of those standards into enormous profit
(congratulations to them and may we all be so successful in life)
In this context the letter from Microsoft to IBM is a "blast" of humor.
Believe it or not.
I have Phd in Physics from a kickass graduate physics department.
I did some graduate work on string charge exchange.
BTW You don't need to have a Phd in Physics to understand why
string theory has been a bad thing for physics. Just read a good basic text on the philosophy and history
of physics then read what the leading proponents of string theory have been
saying for a long time now and then think about it for yourself.
There are also a couple of recent books written by reputable physicists on the subject of the negative effects of string mania.
They shouldn't be hard to find.
String theory might be a viable theory someday but taken in context it has
been a destructive force in physics.
Hatred lowers a persons effective intellectual capacity no matter how
good their brain is.
nothing sucks bigger and harder than string theory
It doesn't need further confirmation.
It has successfully generated many Phd's
On a more serious note:
Extra dimensions were observed long before string theory was a fad.
Just like all of its predecessors it will never be more than a theory.
The question is : is it a useful theory that gets us leverage on our
world and a leg up on the next useful theory. Physical theories can be
tested or disproven but never proven.
me too. Its a nice thing.
no no no you iggorant fool The strings are dangling into the hole and through the process of reverse obfusification the angular momentus is transparently reversified to nullify the boolshiteicus component according to the theory of string-a-lingus-bodingus.
All viable physical theories predict extra dimensions because as a matter of fact we've observed extra dimensions for a long time now.
Long before the string religion began we knew about electric charge and other internal quantum
numbers.
The sky is blue and my penis gets stiff when I look at high quality porn. Are those validation of string theory too
or should I look to an even higher level theory/religion like intelligent design ?
I understand what you are saying, its a really good point.
I'd never thought about it that way and I almost completely agree.
But now consider an imaginary scenario and tell me if it sounds like its almost hard:
The deadline is a week away, the software is still behaving badly, and you've found a bug in the development tools
that makes it ten times harder to find some kinds of bugs in your application. Its too late to switch tools and you
are having to take risks by choosing between different testing strategies that may or may not
pan out in time. Your boss is breathing down your neck to know if execution speed is up when the moron
should be worried about whether or not the code will execute correctly at all. He's promised the moon to the customer
and refused to listen to you when you tried to explain that the required level of effort was way above
what he originally committed to. You have been working unpaid hours evenings and weekends week after week
to make up the difference between reality and his stupid original estimate so that you don't get fired or demoted.
Your kids would ask you for some cool toys ( and you would tell them yes they could have them if you still had a job
at the end of the week ) if they were ever awake when you got home and if they could recognize you with that
vampire look acquired after not having seen the sun for months. D-day arrives and the code isn't ready.
Your boss expresses his disappointment in you in front of your coworkers who are snickering.
If you weren't too blasted out of your mind from shear exhaustion and fear of losing your job
you would rip his limbs off and bludgeon your fellow employees into masses of red pulp.
Of course I just described a completely imaginary situation.
No real programmer deals with anything remotely like this kind of stress, at least not for more than a month or two
preceding a myocardial infarction.
Most programmers just code for fun and profit in a stress free environment.
So I guess that you are right in the final analysis.
I think that you are right on. Many of the reasons for software failure and failure of software product
development projects are well understood and can be found in good textbooks.
A day will come when software product manufacturers are held responsible
and accountable for serious loss, injury or death caused by software failure.
When that happens software engineering will become a respected discipline that encompasses
programming rather than being subsumed by it.
We'll also hear a lot less confused babble masquerading as insightful
wisdom about software development.
There are a growing number of medical and military software applications
for which putting a disclaimer in a EULA doesn't cover it (Referring survivors
to a EULA after a software failure let an ICBM through wouldn't be considered
good humor).
Its obvious to me can't read with comprehension or think with clarity. I suppose its the only way to maintain that much lack of integrity with a decent self image.