Windows patch trips up on HP tool, firewall

TalkBack 29 of 178:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

I always stop to consider

>ever stop to consider? why there could be these problems and it not necessarily be Windoze (how infinately clever) problem?

"it not necessarily be Windoze", "infinately"?

Why is it that those who defend attrocious software design and programming can't seem to construct a grammatical sentence, or spell?

>Do you realize the configs and add-ons and situations that built up over 20 years of EVERYONE using your OS in every different manner?

I have no idea what your ungrammatical sentence is intended to convey. An OS is supposed to provide certain functions, to be used however the user sees fit. It is supposed to be a tool, not a supervisor who dictates how we use the tool.

>I think they do unbelievable work given the task at hand. Nobody else has ever faced this level of complexity, so to make the judgements you have here is just foolish.

Their work is indeed "unbelievable" --- unbelievably poor in quality. Nobody else (not even the government) has ever CREATED this unnecessary level of complexity. Microsoft seems to have adopted the motto of Lewis Caroll's Red Queen: "I would have done it in a much more complicated fashion".

There is only one "e" in the word "judgment". Even M$ spell checkers agree.

I've made no judgments, much less foolish ones. I've simply pointed out a few facts. Because of 20 years of poor design, poor coding, and constant patching, Windoze is virtually unsupportable. This is a fact that any competent programmer realizes.

A similar situation occured with the old Bell telephone switches: There were rat's nests of wire whose function no one knew, and no one dared touch. Any repairs to one set of circuits resulted in the failure of others. The only solution, and that eventually implemented, was the replacement of the entire switch with a completely redesigned model.

Unfortunately, when Microsoft "redesigns" they retain a substantial portion of the patchwork code; and unfortunately they reintroduce the same sort of poor design, poor coding, inaccurate documentation, and inadequate testing, that the redesign was supposed to solve.

>And if the foolish statements you say about how windows is coded [are true?], it doesn't speak well for Google and all of the linux startups that have been hiring MS employees away like crazy. Would you like to explain that?

Your own wording, "crazy", might explain it quite well. There may be a perception that anyone working for M$ is better than the average candidate. More likely, however, is the perception that anyone working for M$ has some sort of inside knowledge that can provide an advantage to a non-M$ company.

And, there may well be some talented programmers working for M$, who are stifled in their work by unrealistic deadlines and company policies and ivory tower "standards" which prevent proper design, proper coding, and adequate testing.

In fact, I know many good programmers who have quit their jobs (or the profession) because the companies they worked for will not allow them to produce a quality product. Perhaps the same applies for M$.

Posted by: cdgoldin   Posted on: 04/18/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now