A former IBM programer once told me that they programed bugs in to MS software so they could sell corporations fixes for them. No one cared one way or the other about the casual user. Of course he may have just been pissed at his former employer, but since he was making more working for someone else...
--graywolf ------------------------------------------------- The optimist's cup is half full, The pessimist's is half empty, The wise man enjoys his drink. ----- Original Message ----- From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: aimcompute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 1:47 PM Subject: Re[4]: Windows XP - Scary! (Was=3 A OT: A computer question...) > Tom, > > I think you give them too much credit. I don't think they really put > 2+2 together (except for maybe Bill Gates). Pretty much schedule is > king. All else (quality and features) be compromised. > > > Bruce > > > > Friday, November 09, 2001, 10:40:38 AM, you wrote: > > a> Well I tend not to want to believe a conspiracy... I've also been writing > a> code for 20 years and there have been no direct orders to write inefficient > a> code. > > a> But is there much difference between a deliberate *attempt* to make a > a> product inefficient and deliberately *allowing* it to be inefficient? The > a> results are the same and innocence can be claimed. > > a> Stockholders and boardmembers hold multiple positions in multiple > a> corporations. When you sell software that works inefficiently and requires > a> new hardware, you profit at both ends. > > a> I speak somewhat tongue-in-cheek, because this is the way the system works, > a> but if the number one goal of corporations is to increase stockholder > a> wealth, what larger conspiracy could there be? > > a> Tom C. > > a> ----- Original Message ----- > a> From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > a> To: "aimcompute" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > a> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 11:08 AM > a> Subject: Re[2]: Windows XP - Scary! (Was=3 A OT: A computer question...) > > > >> aimcompute, > >> > >> I've been writing code for 20 years and have never encountered a > >> company requiring the code to be ineffecient. On the contrary, > >> programmers are quite capable, without being told, to write > >> ineffecient code. Most commonly are deadlines, which don't allow the > >> code to be optimized. The other big problem is that code is very > >> heavily layered, such that most of the layers were not written by the > >> programmer trying to do the optimization. They are many times viewed > >> as black boxes. > >> > >> In the old days, hardware was more expensive than software > >> development, so you had to be very careful to not overtax the > >> hardware. Today, hardware is quite cheap, so many just rely on > >> hardware upgrades to make up for ineffecient code. > >> > >> Conspiracy? No. > >> Something else (attitude, economics, ineptitude)? Yes! > >> > >> For the ultimate in inefficiency, try checkout out the Palm OS world > >> to the PocketPC world. PocketPC tries to overcome in hardware, great > >> waste and inefficiency in software. It is a real eye opener. > >> > >> > >> Bruce Dayton > >> > >> > >> > >> Friday, November 09, 2001, 9:54:53 AM, you wrote: > >> > >> a> Do you know better? > >> > >> a> I've worked with some commercial software products where when you look > a> at > >> a> the internals, a program may be doing something thousands of times that > a> it > >> a> only needed to do once. Or it's not filtering data at the appropriate > >> a> places and hence tablizing tens of thousands of records and moving them > a> all > >> a> over the place. > >> > >> a> As time goes by, data volume grows, and performance nose dives. Time > a> to > >> a> upgrade the hardware! > >> > >> a> Suspicious that the software and hardware companies always "partner" to > >> a> bring the best to corporate America and consumers. > >> > >> a> Tom C. > a> - > a> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > a> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > a> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
