On 26/07/2011, at 12:03 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote: > In contrast, as you mentioned, TCP/IP protocol which is backbone of > today's internet having much better design. > But i think this is a general problem of software evolution. No matter > how hard you try, you cannot foresee all kinds of interactions, > features and use cases for your system, when you designing it from the > beginning. > Because 20 years ago, systems has completely different requirements, > comparing to today's ones. So, what was good enough 20 years ago, > today is not very good.
That makes no sense to me at all. How were the requirements radically different? I still use my computer to play games, communicate with friends and family, solve problems, author text, make music and write programs. That's what I did with my computer twenty years ago. My requirements are the same. Of course, the sophistication and capacity of the programs has grown considerably... so has the hardware... but the actual requirements haven't changed much at all. > And here the problem: is hard to radically change the software, > especially core concepts, because everyone using it, get used to it , > because it made standard. > So you have to maintain compatibility and invent workarounds , patches > and fixes on top of existing things, rather than radically change the > landscape. I disagree with this entirely. Apple manage to change software radically... by tying it with hardware upgrades (speed/capacity in hardware) and other things people want (new features, ease of use). Connect something people want with shifts in software architecture, or make the shift painless and give some kind of advantage and people will upgrade, so long as the upgrade doesn't somehow detract from the original, that is. Of course, if you don't align something people want with software, people won't generally upgrade.
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
