rob.rice, you haven't worked customer service before, have you? That process is not going to lead anywhere - it has to be very easy to give suggestions and track thousands of ideas/bugs/etc. It might be an Linux idea, but it is going to be streamlined for the masses by Windows. :) Programmers are the only people going to use Linux - their processes lead to nothing else, imho.
Posted on 2004-01-27 11:26:40 by bitRAKE

It's not, inform yourself better before you judge. Besides, the fact that unix hasn't changed much in 30 years is not exactly a strong point either.

So it hasn't changed in years, have you ever asked yourself why it hasn't changed that much? It can't be that it still works as intented 30 years ago - it's written by humans you know... :notsure: (or is it lun-artic penguins?)

Originally posted by Henk-Jan
Windows, like all software, is written by humans, and humans make mistakes. Bugs and holes are found in all software, including linux.
Since Windows is exposed to so many people, the chances of finding bugs are also considerably larger.

Usually bugs are rather fast fixed in linux, how long time does it take for M$ to even realize it's a bug not a missunderstading/miss-configuration, and then to come up with fix that works?


Originally posted by bitRAKE
Diversity is a gift to be accepted gracefully.

Yes I agree to some extend that different oppinons/points of view is good - Posted on 2004-01-27 11:37:20 by scientica

another little knowen fact is that M$ will have what amounts to a copright on the info relating to the API in what ever replaces XP
and it is veary likely that nothing from the XP API will be in what ever replaces XP so unless you sell ,000,000.00 worth of software
and play kissie kissie with M$ you will not be alowed to use the info on that API ( M$ won big time in that last court case with the FEDs)

Say... what?

First of all, there isn't really any "XP API" - there's the Win32 API.

"whatever replaces XP" would probably be longhorn. It is said that longhorn will rely on .NET for it's API. Second, the old win32 subsystem will be present - just like there's DOS emulation and win3.x binary support in both 9x and NT.


So it hasn't changed in years, have you ever asked yourself why it hasn't changed that much?

Ask yourself why the X Windowing System (at least XFree86) sucks so much, why there's no enforced file locking, why threads used to rely on forking, why there's no well-documented async I/O support, why the linux kernel is only recently moving from a monolithic architecture, . . .


Usually bugs are rather fast fixed in linux, how long time does it take for M$ to even realize it's a bug not a missunderstading/miss-configuration, and then to come up with fix that works?

The DCOM/RPC bug was fixed 6 months before blaster appeared. Not really MS's fault that there are retarded sysadmins around. How many years did apache have the... what was it called... binchunk? bug? How many versions of bind and sendmail have had gaping wounds?
Posted on 2004-01-27 11:42:59 by f0dder

Yes I agree to some extend that different oppinons/points of view is good - Posted on 2004-01-27 11:47:46 by bitRAKE

If you study Software Engineering, one of the things you are taught is that the customer often doesn't really know what he wants. Often what he wants is not what he needs or what he wants is not possible. Software engineers need to talk to the client and figure out what he REALLY wants, then convince him that this is what he is looking for.
Often the customer can only communicate the surface of the problem due to the limitations of communication itself -- not because they do not know what they want. You are not going to get very far assuming your customer is ignorant. The customer knows their job much better than you do - the challenge is to interface and communicate with the customer to give them what they want. Make the impossible a reality. It is true they do not understand your job or the technology, but that is why they hired you. You respect them and they respect you.
Posted on 2004-01-27 12:26:55 by bitRAKE
So you agree that Microsoft found a niche in the market that unix missed. Then you should also agree that Windows had a right to exist alongside unix. If you did some research on the history of unix, you'd find that for over 10 years, unix ran on machines that were most of the time considerably slower than a 386.


<voice of evil>yes, like G4s :grin: </voice of evil>


Hey! My mother runs fedora! So, yes, it is possible. As far as she is concerned it's a computer and it just works. :)
Posted on 2004-01-27 12:42:52 by Hiroshimator
Often the customer can only communicate the surface of the problem due to the limitations of communication itself -- not because they do not know what they want. You are not going to get very far assuming your customer is ignorant. The customer knows their job much better than you do - the challenge is to interface and communicate with the customer to give them what they want. Make the impossible a reality. It is true they do not understand your job or the technology, but that is why they hired you. You respect them and they respect you.


That is exactly what I said. Why did you feel like repeating it?
Posted on 2004-01-27 12:58:30 by Henk-Jan

That is exactly what I said. Why did you feel like repeating it?
It is nice that we agree. Because I like the sound of my voice. :grin:
Posted on 2004-01-27 13:09:23 by bitRAKE
It is nice that we agree.


I just don't think a discussion will get very far if you just keep agreeing on things and repeating them :)
Posted on 2004-01-27 13:27:11 by Henk-Jan

The DCOM/RPC bug was fixed 6 months before blaster appeared. Not really MS's fault that there are retarded sysadmins around. How many years did apache have the... what was it called... binchunk? bug? How many versions of bind and sendmail have had gaping wounds?

Did you miss the word usually? I didn't say they didn't fix bugs I just asked how long time it usually takes for MS to notice&fix a bug - I don't know I haven't clocked them...
Yes, there was a fix 6 months before someone made a big exploit, but so what? I agree that 'retarded sysadmins' have them selves to blaim, but that is valid for all kinds of OSes, not just windows...(or should I say windblows just because I can :tongue: ;) ) I asked about the time it takes to get a fix since a bug is found not an exploit... :sweat:


bitRAKE, I see you point. But I still we can't accpet them, we must as you say "resist and struggle against them." - to me not accepting them is a way of resisting them.
Posted on 2004-01-27 13:52:12 by scientica

I didn't say they didn't fix bugs I just asked how long time it usually takes for MS to notice&fix a bug - I don't know I haven't clocked them...

Dunno, haven't clocked it either. But (except in the case of the IE rendering engine >_<), exploitable bugs are usually fixed before 'anything serious' exploiting them comes around - and that's what is most important.

As for regular bugfixes, it will depend on the severity of the bug. Minor bugfixes will be released in groups, rather than individually. When you have to do a lot of compatibility testing, "cvsupdate + make world" type patch releasing isn't really an option. Severe bugs (especially the exploitable ones) will often have bugfixes released rather quickly.

It also depends in which component a bug is located. Clearly, the level of competence inside microsoft varies a lot. The interface coders might as well have been VB monkeys, while you'll probably be hard pressed to find better coders than the kernel division (oh, and the NT kernel was well planned, rather than allowed mushroom-growth like linux).
Posted on 2004-01-27 14:04:17 by f0dder
Linux is only just worth the money, but only just.
Posted on 2004-01-27 14:22:32 by Mirno
Bottom line: if you don't like Windows, don't use it (I do the same with linux! :)). But don't go to Windows-messageboards and annoy the people that DO like Windows with your whining.
Nobody forces you to use Windows, or x86, or anything. You still have a free choice. Use it and be happy, and let others be happy with their choice aswell, even if it's different from yours (different people have different needs/wants!).
Posted on 2004-01-27 14:25:33 by Henk-Jan

I just don't think a discussion will get very far if you just keep agreeing on things and repeating them :)
True, but I have given you my version so you can compare and contrast. For example, I disagree with saying the customer does not know what they want -- that is dis-respectfully to me. If the customer does not know what they want then you shouldn't be working for them because they don't REALLY know they want you working for them. ;)
Posted on 2004-01-27 14:32:19 by bitRAKE

For example, I disagree with saying the customer does not know what they want.

It is true, though - although it should probably be phrased somewhat differently. They usually have some very fluffy outlines of what they want, but those are usually very vague... then comes a long dialogue to nail down the specifics, refine ideas, adjust user interfaces, et cetera.

I think it's fair enough to say that customers often don't really know what they want :)
Posted on 2004-01-27 14:35:25 by f0dder

bitRAKE, I see you point. But I still we can't accpet them, we must as you say "resist and struggle against them." - to me not accepting them is a way of resisting them.
I see what you mean, but I wish to promote awareness verses the violent type of resistance we have seen in the past. Through understanding our resistance may take a more advanced form which is usually more effective, imho. Different terminology to promote a change in perspective.
Posted on 2004-01-27 14:43:34 by bitRAKE
For example, I disagree with saying the customer does not know what they want -- that is dis-respectfully to me.


I said he doesn't know what he REALLY wants. Read more carefully. I meant the same as you did, he only knows what he wants on the surface. I didn't mean to be disrespectful. If people read/listen more carefully, there would be a lot less discussion and fighting in the world :)
Posted on 2004-01-27 14:46:30 by Henk-Jan
most clients know very really what they want, forcing you to tread extremely careful.

Do they know what's inside it? Not always..sometimes a little (those are the worst)..but they usually don't care as long as it works and is delivered within specs (read budget).

What we translate as "knowing what he really wants" usually means finding the best/correct way to contract it all and put a price on it....prevention of scope creep.
Posted on 2004-01-27 15:15:17 by Hiroshimator
I don't know why I diden't see this befor it's so plane so simple and right in my face the whole time f0dder and henk-jan are eather M$ stock holders or M$ mind goons out to keep people from trying linux or BSD after all linux and BSD for the most part came to be what thay are by word of mouth or word of forum so M$ will kill it by word of mouth or word of forum that explanes why f0dder was giveing out advice that would never work and yank thos straying from the M$ fold back from a free O/S all the FUD all the lies I cant beleave I dident see this befor think about it people why else would thay tack bad things sed about windoze so persnol eather way its there jobs I have had to deal with control games all my life this is how low M$ can go like a drug pusher send ya a frind who is olny your frind to keep you buying there dope can any one else find an explnation that makes more since for the way thay act when ever I say something good about linux or bad about windblows these games are the same ones a pimp uses to beat down a prostute so from this point of view M$ is also part of the white slave trade
Posted on 2004-01-27 19:47:23 by rob.rice
if this wasent true why would it matter to them if someons says something good about free O/Ss
HAY every body tack a good long look this may be the olny place that you will ever get to see sometwo try to braine wash someone
Posted on 2004-01-27 19:52:34 by rob.rice