So it's been 15 years since 1.0. I'll drink to that. There's got to be a reason Linus designated the code worthy of 1.0 status. It may be kind of arbitrary for a first birthday, but like I said.. who cares? It's Linux, it's awesome, it's been around for at least 15 years. Specific dates are irrelevant.
you produce a product which has an intended use. During development someone says "hey if I do this while I am using it, it breaks". Its not designed to do that. nor is that use consistent with the intended operational parameters. This is not a design flaw unless the use which produces the problem is similar enough to the intended use to presume a high incidence of mis-use.
Um.. hello, but I think the intended use is exactly what causes the problem.
This could be expanded to include a whole lot more. I have considered something I call CRISP: Community Resources & Information Services Protocol. It's a yellowpages of everything under and organized data api, around which social networks can be formed.
So it's been 15 years since 1.0. I'll drink to that. There's got to be a reason Linus designated the code worthy of 1.0 status. It may be kind of arbitrary for a first birthday, but like I said.. who cares? It's Linux, it's awesome, it's been around for at least 15 years. Specific dates are irrelevant.
Here's a better analogy.
you produce a product which has an intended use. During development someone says "hey if I do this while I am using it, it breaks". Its not designed to do that. nor is that use consistent with the intended operational parameters. This is not a design flaw unless the use which produces the problem is similar enough to the intended use to presume a high incidence of mis-use.
Um.. hello, but I think the intended use is exactly what causes the problem.
This could be expanded to include a whole lot more. I have considered something I call CRISP: Community Resources & Information Services Protocol. It's a yellowpages of everything under and organized data api, around which social networks can be formed.