The main reason Space Shuttle reliability is not a priority in the software industry in general is that the whole focus of the industry has become the quick buck, the rush to the IPO, the dazzling of the user with endless "features" that have minimal utility. The classic example was Windows 3.1. It was colorful, had lots of features - and barely worked.
The marketroids who set timetables for software projects are another problem. Most of them think any arbitrarily complex piece of software can be designed, implemented and tested in about 3 weeks and get impatient when this doesn't happen. In the shuttle program the engineers are in charge and they determine the timetables.
I don't know, if they wanted to spy on you why put the spy code in something as obvious as Satan's favorite paper clip? Something of the James Bond effect here. That is, a spy who acted like James Bond, seducing women, throwing money around and driving fast cars would draw too much attention to himself and get his cover blown. It's the quiet accountant who lives in a modest house who always turns out the be the one. The analogy to that would be a nice quiet little program that nobody ever saw because it didn't even tell you it was running and the process accounting system had been rigged not to show it. That's the problem with closed source OSs they're like Gump's box of chocolates. You never know what yer gonna git.
Microsoft continues its usual tactics because it realizes that the American people at large think of it in positive terms. So what if a few pointy-headed geeks and intellectuals think they suck? That's their spin on it. Read the local paper and not slashdot and you'll see that Joe sixpack totally buys all the bullshit about "innovation". Sad but true people...
Even granting your point that DX is now better than OpenGL (which I really don't), what might OpenGL be today if Microsoft had been willing to play nice and develop OpenGL alongside other companies like they originally said they would? - remember NT's original OpenGL support?
It really seems like another case of MS not being happy with the existing open standards and deciding to reinvent the wheel using proprietary technology.
The majority of ALL code is crap. The problem with commercial closed source software is that in addition to poor overall quality you have incompetent managers adding to the chaos. I see this at the company I work for. The CEO is an utter nitwit with a degree in Marketing who thinks that any arbitrarily complex piece of software can be designed, coded and tested in about 3 days. The pressure this places on the technical staff leads to constant fsck.ups.
At least with OS the suits are replaced by programmers who usually have a clue.
Software development in general needs an overhaul. There needs to more attention to following standardized design and testing proceedures. This is the case in both OS and CS (close source) development efforts. Unfortunately, the CS community is dominated by management that sees only the bottom line and regards these proceedures as cutting into that bottom line. My guess, the revolution is coding practice will start in the OS community.
Professional regulation a la architects is not going to happen now that open source is here. The analogy would be something like "you will now need a Professional Software Engineer licence to write code". I don't think so. With people all over the planet in different countries contributing to open source projects that the data infrastructure of the entire planet uses this kind of scheme would be (fortunately) totally unenforceable. Of course that doesn't mean that American big business/big gummint (is there any difference) won't try to get something like this. So be on the watch.
A fairly obscure load balancing technique called round robin has been in use for some time. Basically, the DNS server sends each new user to a different web server in turn and then starts over when it runs out of servers. I know this only maps a class of users to a given web server while a session id maps a single user (we hope;-) but I thought this might help dent the patent case.
I am so tired of hearing people whine that the problem with the public schools is lack of funding. We are spending far more per student today (in constant dollars) than we did during, say, the 1950s. Yet the kids today, when compared with those of that less well funded era are stupid, violent and illiterate - why? Because most people have no choice but to send their kids to the public schools. We have a government enforced monopoly that is doing what monopolies always do, reduce quality, raise costs and generally screw people.
You people who get so upset about the Micro$oft monopoly ought to think about that. The American public school system is the educational equivalent of Windows. Only by giving people a choice and allowing competition will we ever get schools that run with Linux-like quality and efficiency.
Sad that./ seems to have so many such liberal fools for readers. I live in FL now and have lived in gun-control paradises like Maryland as well. I can say that thanks to Florida's concealed carry law (you can easily get a permit here to carry a concealed weapon) I feel a lot safer walking around here than I ever did in Maryland with it's restrictive gun laws. Let me say that passing teenagers are a lot more respectful down here than up north too. They don't hassle pedestrians nearly as much as up north since they have a healthy fear of gun-totin' passers by. Some of the highest murder rates in the country are in places like Baltimore and DC where it's illegal to have a handgun even in your own home. Long live the second amendment, freedom and privacy.
"So all you/.ers who think the market should solve it: Get real. The market is great for many, many problems, but there are times when society as a whole has to protect what it believes in. I believe in freedom for everyone. - Don't you?"
Oh yes, of course I believe in freedom for everyone. I believe everyone should have the "freedom" to have a house, free medical care, free food and a Mercedes - all at taxpayer expense.
This comment of yours illustrates a classic leftist misunderstanding of the whole concept of freedom. Look at the Bill of Rights and you will notice that none of the rights listed there are coercive. That is, my freedoms under the Bill of Rights do not impose any burden on others (i.e. I may speak but you don't have to listen). The modern liberal idea of freedom which is implied in your remark and which I satirize above is coercive in that your freedoms under it impose a burden on me. This kind of "freedom" emodied in things like the ADA is really nothing but totalitarianism making cynical use of the plight of various disadvantaged groups to disguise its real goals.
What you have to realize is that at some point these clueless morons had to go to a law office, sit down with an attorney and then tell him, with a straight face, that they wanted to sue a company for making stuff that it turned out their kids liked. Then the attorney had to keep a straight face while they described what they wanted to sue over. Imagine that conversation. What kind of a world do these people (plaintiffs and attorneys all) live in? How do they sleep at night?
Microsoft has now shown that, in addition to programmers, consumers, open standards and IT managers, it also has no respect for academics. Hopefully, they will remember this when MS comes around and tries to sell them that NT server deal mentioned in a previous article here.
Slashdot Mirror
The main reason Space Shuttle reliability is not a priority in the software industry in general is that the whole focus of the industry has become the quick buck, the rush to the IPO, the dazzling of the user with endless "features" that have minimal utility. The classic example was Windows 3.1. It was colorful, had lots of features - and barely worked.
The marketroids who set timetables for software projects are another problem. Most of them think any arbitrarily complex piece of software can be designed, implemented and tested in about 3 weeks and get impatient when this doesn't happen. In the shuttle program the engineers are in charge and they determine the timetables.
Yeah, I'm a bitter, angry little coder...
I don't know, if they wanted to spy on you why put the spy code in something as obvious as Satan's favorite paper clip? Something of the James Bond effect here. That is, a spy who acted like James Bond, seducing women, throwing money around and driving fast cars would draw too much attention to himself and get his cover blown. It's the quiet accountant who lives in a modest house who always turns out the be the one. The analogy to that would be a nice quiet little program that nobody ever saw because it didn't even tell you it was running and the process accounting system had been rigged not to show it. That's the problem with closed source OSs they're like Gump's box of chocolates. You never know what yer gonna git.
Was that enough movie references or what...
Microsoft continues its usual tactics because it realizes that the American people at large think of it in positive terms. So what if a few pointy-headed geeks and intellectuals think they suck? That's their spin on it. Read the local paper and not slashdot and you'll see that Joe sixpack totally buys all the bullshit about "innovation". Sad but true people...
Even granting your point that DX is now better than OpenGL (which I really don't), what might OpenGL be today if Microsoft had been willing to play nice and develop OpenGL alongside other companies like they originally said they would? - remember NT's original OpenGL support?
It really seems like another case of MS not being happy with the existing open standards and deciding to reinvent the wheel using proprietary technology.
The majority of ALL code is crap. The problem with commercial closed source software is that in addition to poor overall quality you have incompetent managers adding to the chaos. I see this at the company I work for. The CEO is an utter nitwit with a degree in Marketing who thinks that any arbitrarily complex piece of software can be designed, coded and tested in about 3 days. The pressure this places on the technical staff leads to constant fsck.ups.
At least with OS the suits are replaced by programmers who usually have a clue.
Software development in general needs an overhaul. There needs to more attention to following standardized design and testing proceedures. This is the case in both OS and CS (close source) development efforts. Unfortunately, the CS community is dominated by management that sees only the bottom line and regards these proceedures as cutting into that bottom line. My guess, the revolution is coding practice will start in the OS community.
Professional regulation a la architects is not going to happen now that open source is here. The analogy would be something like "you will now need a Professional Software Engineer licence to write code". I don't think so. With people all over the planet in different countries contributing to open source projects that the data infrastructure of the entire planet uses this kind of scheme would be (fortunately) totally unenforceable. Of course that doesn't mean that American big business/big gummint (is there any difference) won't try to get something like this. So be on the watch.
A fairly obscure load balancing technique called round robin has been in use for some time. Basically, the DNS server sends each new user to a different web server in turn and then starts over when it runs out of servers. I know this only maps a class of users to a given web server while a session id maps a single user (we hope ;-) but I thought this might help dent the patent case.
I am so tired of hearing people whine that the problem with the public schools is lack of funding. We are spending far more per student today (in constant dollars) than we did during, say, the 1950s. Yet the kids today, when compared with those of that less well funded era are stupid, violent and illiterate - why? Because most people have no choice but to send their kids to the public schools. We have a government enforced monopoly that is doing what monopolies always do, reduce quality, raise costs and generally screw people.
You people who get so upset about the Micro$oft monopoly ought to think about that. The American public school system is the educational equivalent of Windows. Only by giving people a choice and allowing competition will we ever get schools that run with Linux-like quality and efficiency.
Sad that ./ seems to have so many such liberal fools for readers. I live in FL now and have lived in gun-control paradises like Maryland as well. I can say that thanks to Florida's concealed carry law (you can easily get a permit here to carry a concealed weapon) I feel a lot safer walking around here than I ever did in Maryland with it's restrictive gun laws. Let me say that passing teenagers are a lot more respectful down here than up north too. They don't hassle pedestrians nearly as much as up north since they have a healthy fear of gun-totin' passers by. Some of the highest murder rates in the country are in places like Baltimore and DC where it's illegal to have a handgun even in your own home. Long live the second amendment, freedom and privacy.
"So all you /.ers who think the market should solve it: Get real. The market is great for many, many problems, but there are times when society as a whole has to protect what it believes in. I believe in freedom for everyone. - Don't you?"
Oh yes, of course I believe in freedom for everyone. I believe everyone should have the "freedom" to have a house, free medical care, free food and a Mercedes - all at taxpayer expense.
This comment of yours illustrates a classic leftist misunderstanding of the whole concept of freedom. Look at the Bill of Rights and you will notice that none of the rights listed there are coercive. That is, my freedoms under the Bill of Rights do not impose any burden on others (i.e. I may speak but you don't have to listen). The modern liberal idea of freedom which is implied in your remark and which I satirize above is coercive in that your freedoms under it impose a burden on me. This kind of "freedom" emodied in things like the ADA is really nothing but totalitarianism making cynical use of the plight of various disadvantaged groups to disguise its real goals.
What you have to realize is that at some point these clueless morons had to go to a law office, sit down with an attorney and then tell him, with a straight face, that they wanted to sue a company for making stuff that it turned out their kids liked. Then the attorney had to keep a straight face while they described what they wanted to sue over. Imagine that conversation. What kind of a world do these people (plaintiffs and attorneys all) live in? How do they sleep at night?
Microsoft has now shown that, in addition to programmers, consumers, open standards and IT managers, it also has no respect for academics. Hopefully, they will remember this when MS comes around and tries to sell them that NT server deal mentioned in a previous article here.