On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Brian Desmond <[email protected]> wrote: >>... including 90% of Microsoft's stuff, falls into the category of >>"poorly-written". > > I have no idea what your benchmark is for commercial software testing/design > given that statement...
I have no idea what your point is, given that statement. If you think Microsoft stuff is the best thing ever, fine. Good for you. I'm not applying for membership in the Microsoft fan club any time soon, so you can still run for the president of it, if that's what you want. If you're just curious what I mean, I thought I was pretty clear: Most of the software in the world, including most of Microsoft's stuff, I would call "poorly-written". I'll admit I wrote "90%" because it sounded good, not out of any scientific sample; hence I'm changing to "most" here. As a random example, from something I was dealing with just today: Word 2007 will still occasionally print "Page 2 of 1", "Page 3 of 1", etc. I know this bug existed at least as far back as Word 2000 or 97. According to Wikipedia, Word was first released in 1983. Here we are, nearly 30 years later, and Microsoft still hasn't managed to teach a computer how to count. If you're looking for a company/organization I would hold up as an example of how to do it right, I don't have one. Like I said, most software is poorly-written. It's a universal. Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap. (And I'm not sure about the other 10%.) If you're looking for what I would theoretically define as "well-written", I would start with "provides the desired functionality, without defects". I'd toss "comes with clear, useful documentation" in there as well. Just as a starting point, you understand. -- Ben ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
