Previously you tried to sell the idea that because it was
not possible to test _everything_ then it was okay to be
slovenly and not conduct diligent testing and quality control.
Did not say anything remotely like that.
Now you want to sell the idea that because it was not
reasonable to
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13526_3-10137684-27.html
We'd Do Zune Differently
Robbie Bach, the guy who heads the division at MS that did the Zune,
seems to be saying that, in hindsight, MS should never have gotten into
the business of manufacturing their own player. Perhaps in the future MS
will
When did they start manufacturing it? I know at least the first gen was a
Toshiba.
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13526_3-10137684-27.html
We'd Do Zune Differently
Robbie Bach, the guy who heads the division at MS that did the Zune,
When did they start manufacturing it? I know at least the first gen was a
Toshiba.
Robbie Bach thinks they manufacturing it, but what does he know?
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/25/fcc-reveals-toshiba-1089-and-its-looking-a-whole-lot-like-a/
FCC says Toshiba. MS may have had more to do with it after the first gen,
but then the first gen is what we are talking about.
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
When
http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/25/fcc-reveals-toshiba-1089-and-its-lookin
g-a-whole-lot-like-a/
FCC says Toshiba. MS may have had more to do with it after the first gen,
but then the first gen is what we are talking about.
Using your twisted logic, the iPod is made by Hon Hai Precision
I know it's hard for you to let facts have an effect on your opinion...I
can't even fathom why you are arguing this point, but there is a difference
between an apple designed product being outsourced for production and MS
buying a product already built by someone else and rebranding it.
On Fri,
I guess that just means WFBs forgive MS for sins AFBs would never
forgive; if Apple put the brand on junk, Jobs would catch no end of
hell!
Stand by your brand!
Thank you,
Mark Snyder
-Original Message-
I know it's hard for you to let facts have an effect on your opinion...I
can't even
Sorry if the truth disturbs you, in point of fact I've never owned a zune, I
don't think I've ever even touched a zune.
Mark, can you tell me where in this post I speak of forgiveness or lack of,
or speak of junk? All I said is that MS branded a toshiba built player,
that's not a judgement, just
Mark, can you tell me where in this post I speak of forgiveness or lack of,
or speak of junk? All I said is that MS branded a toshiba built player,
that's not a judgement, just fact. You are going to nail yourself in the
head one of these days with your knee jerk reactions.
1) Mike wants you to
Now that is completely untrue. I never even once said it wasn't a MS
product. You see things that aren't there and then go with this alternate
reality. I say in the post you pasted yourself here that MS branded a
toshiba player, never once have I said the zune was not a MS product.
Please
Mike, please what I said: If Apple bought a 3rd-prty product an put the
Apple logo on it, and it had the Zune date bug, the AFBs would not stop
dunning Steve. But the WFBs have that happen and say, oh, bummer and
move on.
World of difference! Apple protects its brand, MS and WFBs pass the
blame
First, not enough people even bought the first gen zune, or any other, to
create any turmoil. I don't even know what or who a WFB is, I don't own a
zune, I never have even used a zune...MS bought a player from toshiba, put
their name on it and sold it with a cpu that caused the unit to lock up
But are you saying that you manufacture hardware, and that you test every
function of every hardware component that you purchase from third parties?
Because that is what we're talking about. If so, your company is one in a
million and I salute you.
See, that is the corruptive result of MS's
The same company lets it's code out before testing it, letting us test it
for them. That's the point, you keep twisting it into Apple's favor because
you can't see anything but that soft glow from Steve Jobs' eyes. And I
never said they had poor software, that's your tactic. I said very clearly
A year isn't usually described as 'momentary' and once again you take it
where I wasn't going to try and make some crazy point. It's laughable to
think that every iteration of OS X was a 'major' release. The reason Apple
can stay ahead of malware writers is because there are none being written,
The company that assembles a product is responsible for every part in
that product
OK, so you DO think that Apple tests their Intel CPUs to exhaustion and
would have caught the math bug that nobody else did. (But I'm sure that is
different...somehow...)
When a bridge falls down and families
Cool, add collapsing bridges to your previous examples of crashing
airplanes, burning buildings, and failing cardiac resuscitators. Next at
bat: defective elevator cables!
It appears to be beyond your comprehension that MP3 players do not have the
same fail-safe requirements as these.
Nonesense.
It appears to be beyond your comprehension that MP3 players do not
have the same fail-safe requirements as these.
Nonesense [sic]. I reject your weaseling excuses
OK, MP3 players have the same fail-safe requirements as 747s. My bad. Don't
know what I could've been thinking.
The first draft of a shell script I wrote yesterday went into an infinite
loop. We all laughed and declared: Oops I made a Zune.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy,
I don't believe you at all...there is no way more then two people in any
room even know what a zune is. :p
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
The first draft of a shell script I wrote yesterday went into an infinite
loop. We all laughed and declared: Oops I made
OK, MP3 players have the same fail-safe requirements as 747s. My bad. Don't
know what I could've been thinking.
I did not ever use the word failsafe. You are once again trying to drag
the discussion to a nutty place.
Previously you tried to sell the idea that because it was not possible to
Tom Piwowar
OK, MP3 players have the same fail-safe requirements
as 747s. My bad. Don't know what I could've been thinking.
I did not ever use the word failsafe. You are once again
trying to drag the discussion to a nutty place.
Previously you tried to sell the idea that because it was
not
I think the interesting part here is that MS is accepting below par
work from vendors.
It fits in exactly with what I said, they are being reactive instead
of proactive. It is also the sign of management problems.
I did a little reading of Steve Ballmers Bio and it is interesting to
say
They also didn't apparently use that CPU in the next gen, not sure what
toshiba did since all their players were affected also, but I believe they
sold even less of those then the zune.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Wayne Dernoncourt way...@panix.com wrote:
Tom Piwowar
OK, MP3 players have
I think the blame is being placed incorrectly. It seems that
the code in question was part of a library licensed/purchased
by MS to develop the Zune? That library functionality didn't
have enough unit tests to test for correct functionality. I
don't see any reason to believe that MS should
The Zune was just a rebranded gigabeat from Toshiba. It wasn't even as
simple as buying one component off the shelf, they bought the whole thing
from Toshiba.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall
popoz...@earthlink.net wrote:
I think the interesting part here is that MS is
The Zune was just a rebranded gigabeat from Toshiba. It wasn't even as
simple as buying one component off the shelf, they bought the whole thing
from Toshiba.
Next our WFBs will assert that MS isn't responsible for anything because
the company is really operated by commands beamed in from Alpha
I think the blame is being placed incorrectly. It seems that
the code in question was part of a library licensed/purchased
by MS to develop the Zune? That library functionality didn't
have enough unit tests to test for correct functionality. I
don't see any reason to believe that MS should
This stupid thread has gone on far longer than the life of the product I think.
MS screwed up. We all know it.
There was a time when Apple was screwing up for the same
reasons. They lost the vision their founder started them with and he
had to come back to rescue them.
I have already
I think you need to take a breath there big guy, calm down...easy. Hate to
see how you react when something important comes up. Just mentioned that
Toshiba had the same issue cause it was the same product...easy, Tom.
Yer gonna give yourself an aneuryism.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Tom
I question this assertion. Bashing MS over this while
praising Apple does not assume that Apple finds *all*
such bugs,
Again, why does Apple have to be perfect? The argument does not
depend on absolute conditions.
Well, because what Tom has said boils down to There was a bug in the
Testing is iterative, and good testing should find as
many flaws as possible (errors and design flaws) and
cannot end until every thing is correct.
I'm not disagreeing with you that extensive testing is a must. Of course it
is. But ensuring that everything is correct, while an admirable
If you don't try to test until everything is correct, you will suffer
later. My testing finds A LOT. As close to everything as I'm likely to
get.
I said Apple's experience designing and testing hardware and software is
an advantage they have over MS. I don't see that as bashing MS. They
both
If you don't try to test until everything is correct, you
will suffer later. My testing finds A LOT. As close to
everything as I'm likely to get.
Agreed. But you can't find everything, which is what the Other Poster seems
to want MS to do.
I said Apple's experience designing and testing
No, I was referring to the Other Poster's insistence that MS's failure to
find this bug is prima facie evidence of their incompetence. That's
MS-bashing, and it's ridiculous.
You are working hard to strip the specifics out of the discussion so you
can make vague generalities and issue blanket
I'm not disagreeing with you that extensive testing is a must. Of course it
is. But ensuring that everything is correct, while an admirable goal,
isn't really possible with current technology for a nontrivial program. You
can only try to get as close to it as you can.
MS has depressed your
I am currently the test manager for an enterprise system. We test every
functional requirement. In attributes with a fixed number of values, we
test each variation and check for expected results. Tests are mapped to
one or more requirements and vice-versa. For each test misstep, I write
a test
I benefitted from a previous group whose testing was of the Elbonian type and
they really struggled to go-live and avoid getting canceled. I still have to
justify why I can't do 6-8 weeks of testing in 5-10 days, though. Why I need
time to verify requirements and write a test plan. I use a
MS has depressed your expectations so much that I see
you are willing to accept anything they dish out.
Insisting that MS rarely makes such mistakes is ridiculous
Nice job of refuting things I never said...
*
** List
I'm sorry, but bashing MS over this while praising Apple assumes
that Apple
finds all bugs in all third-party components, and I think I can
pretty well
assure you that it doesn't.
I question this assertion. Bashing MS over this while praising
Apple does
not assume that Apple finds *all*
I wouldn't agree Apple is better at catching these things. The 2.0 version
for iphone is an example. Apple is just different at these things. If
Apple were better then there wouldn't be more security vulnerabilities fixed
in OS X then Vista. For 2007 these results:
How could Apple with supposed better research into it's code and it's
vendors code, have so many more fixes for the same time period? And this
isn't about security, just about Apple putting out OS X and then having to
go back and fix some of it's code. As every vendor must. Under Tom's
logic,
The same company lets it's code out before testing it, letting us test it
for them. That's the point, you keep twisting it into Apple's favor because
you can't see anything but that soft glow from Steve Jobs' eyes. And I
never said they had poor software, that's your tactic. I said very clearly
This is just plain bizarre.
It is plainly obvious that no one is going to check every line of
code in every third party component. Such a task would be
almost as difficult as originating the code in the first place. That
question is purely rhetorical and as such needs no answer.
There is,
One line of code is like any other, you silly goose...easy is relative.
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
As Mike notes, you have finally answered the question, rather
circuitously,
with No, Apple does not check every line of code in every third-party
As Mike notes, you have finally answered the question, rather circuitously,
with No, Apple does not check every line of code in every third-party
component. If you admit (finally) that no one checks -every- line of code
in -every- component, then you cannot classify MS as incompetent because it
In the case of a essential calendaring component, it would be
reasonable to assume that this would include checking various
critical dates, like Dec 31, Jan 1 for every year and Feb 29, Mar 1
for leap years
The problem is, so much is essential. You may be able to find a few things
like the
Because it is virtually impossible for *everyone* to
check *everything* you want to absolve MS from
checking even the simplest things.
You sure do know how to exaggerate. As I'm sure you well know, that is not
at all what I said. What I said was, You can't test everything, which is
rather
I think it's easy to assume MS should have run a test for leap years,
perhaps they only checked to see if dates functioned properly. My
contention isn't that MS shouldn't have done more, but that most companies
don't do more. David's example is evident that Apple doesn't check
everything.
This problem has been ongoing for decades in the computerized world.
When I worked for the Veterinary computer company, I used to dread
the mornings after an update had been introduced.
I was in hardware support, which meant every piece of hardware plus
OS that was attached.
So why would I
I am currently the test manager for an enterprise system. We test every
functional requirement. In attributes with a fixed number of values, we
test each variation and check for expected results. Tests are mapped to
one or more requirements and vice-versa. For each test misstep, I write
a test
So your kid comes home with an F on his math test. He
says It's not my fault, I copied from Johnny's paper.
You say Next time copy from someone who's smarter.
You understand that this is analogy is completely bogus, right? You want to
use analogies, try to use ones that make sense:
Johnny's
DRM probably is the answer to M$ woes in Zune2K9
debacle. It needs to be able to know your license
is current for the subscription service. Can't
have you hearing licensed music after your license
has expired.
As we now know, and as I suspected in earlier messages, this is not the
case.
Johnny's mom is an incompetent mother because she failed to test the cheese
that she put in his ham sandwich for E.Coli, salmonella, lead, melamine, and
every other possible contaminant, and he threw up in gym.
You are saying that it's the vendor's responsibility to analyze the
microcode of every
This guy does not work for MS: www.chow.com/stories/11065
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
You may think it is all right for the vendor to
take a see no evil attitude. I don't.
So, it is your position that Apple analyzes the microcode on all components
it purchases, including the CPUs?
By the way, have you now officially dropped your contention that MS did this
on purpose?
So, it is your position that Apple analyzes the microcode on all components
it purchases, including the CPUs?
Apple's vendors perennially complain that Apple sticks their nose too
much into their business. Intel's management remarked that Apple was all
over them before switching to their
Intel's management remarked that Apple was all over
them before switching to their processors and pushed
them to do some things differently. Verizon passed
on the iPhone because Apple as too intrusive.
So they asked for stuff (MS does too, not that this would make any
difference to you).
That would be a 'no'.
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
So they asked for stuff (MS does too, not that this would make any
difference to you). That doesn't respond to the question, which you have
now
failed to answer twice: Does Apple analyze every line of code
Statements that include terms like every, all, none, always, or
never usually have the answer built into the question. Your
ridiculous, stacked-deck question is unworthy.
As Mike notes, you have finally answered the question, rather circuitously,
with No, Apple does not check every line of
Interesting thing popping up on some forums. It's starting to look like it
wasn't just the zune that was affected but also other mp3 players which used
the freescale cpu. Looks like Tom may have to stop blithering and foaming
about MS. Course I'm sure he'll say MS engineers should have been in
Interesting thing popping up on some forums. It's
starting to look like it wasn't just the zune that
was affected but also other mp3 players which used
the freescale cpu
Looks like it. Some guy found the source code for the clock driver
(apparently it's on the Freescale web site), and
Interesting thing popping up on some forums. It's starting to look like it
wasn't just the zune that was affected but also other mp3 players which used
the freescale cpu. Looks like Tom may have to stop blithering and foaming
about MS. Course I'm sure he'll say MS engineers should have been in
So...freescale copied from who?
Under your logic when intel put out cpu's that did bad math...it was
Redhat's fault cause that was the OS you put on it?
I forget at times I actually expect you to make sense when MS or anything
even remotely related to MS is the topic.
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 1:57
I have been altogether too nice about this. See..
http://zune.cheddrmedia.com
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Chris Dunford ch...@covesoftware.comwrote:
DRM probably is the answer to M$ woes in Zune2K9 debacle.
It needs to be able to know your license is current for
the subscription service. Can't have you hearing licensed
music after your license has expired.
The clock software in the Zune is a driver. When a driver in a computer goes
whack, anything can happen, including a freeze, which is in fact what did
happen. If you are going to tell me that your iPods and iPhones and Macs
will all go merrily on their way as if nothing happened when their drivers
Hey it is a best guess and I stated it that way
Yes, you did, but Tom didn't; his message assumed that it was a fact. That's
why I responded to him and not to you.
We bitch when Apple screws up too
Yes, but Tom bitches differently for Apple and MS. MS's mistakes all have
one of two possible
It is amazing how far some people will go to defend their one true
love.
No it is not acceptable for MS to migrate its piss-poor software
engineering practices to the realm of MP3 players (a.k.a. embedded
controllers). People who write embedded controllers are expected to do
a
far better
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Chris Dunford ch...@covesoftware.comwrote:
Hey it is a best guess and I stated it that way
Yes, you did, but Tom didn't; his message assumed that it was a fact.
That's
why I responded to him and not to you.
But you went after my point not anything that Tom
He never characterizes Apple's mistakes this way.
Not true. There is just less opportunity to do so. MS is also a much
larger and much richer company. They have the resources to do better. Why
don't they?
*
** List info,
This thread has gone on longer then the forums with actual zune users
discussing the problem! lol
Mike
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
He never characterizes Apple's mistakes this way.
Not true. There is just less opportunity to do so. MS is also a much
But you went after my point not anything that Tom said.
I re-read my message, and I can see how you could have read it that way. My
intent, however, was to point out that Tom's message assumed that the
problem was, in fact, DRM-related (which, again, I very much doubt):
It is just like
That was a mighty big stretch. I did not state or even imply what you
claim. I also gave examples that involved airplanes and EKG machines.
I do think this is all smoke to obscure the real issue: piss-poor
software engineering on the part of MS. Of course you don't want to
respond to that.
I do think this is all smoke to obscure the real issue: piss-poor
software engineering on the part of MS. Of course you don't want to
respond to that.
All this sturm and drang over a very minor glitch in a driver for a
1st gen product, no longer produced, and made by a 3rd party. You'd
think
He's just from cupertino and sticking to his guns and hatred of microsoft..
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Jeff Wright jswri...@gmail.com wrote:
I do think this is all smoke to obscure the real issue: piss-poor
software engineering on the part of MS. Of course you don't want to
respond to
All this sturm and drang over a very minor glitch in a driver for a
1st gen product, no longer produced, and made by a 3rd party.
Another puff of obscuring smoke: now the Zune is not even an MS product.
It was really made by those other guys. All that stuff we read about
the Zune Development
We are certainly asking too much expecting that an MP3
player actually play MP3s.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAKZ-O70wNg
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy,
Another puff of obscuring smoke: now the Zune is not even an MS
product. It was really made by those other guys.
What are you smoking?
You were complaining about MS quality control. Now, I have no idea who
wrote the driver in question, but it may be that not a single hand from MS
touched this
You may consider it minor, because they are coming out with a fix for
it. Some may consider major because it disables the device.
However, I think none of us are happy when a device is disabled.
Chris Dunford wrote:
Meanwhile my 1st Gen iPod keeps on ticking.
As do the
You may consider it minor, because they are coming out with a fix for
it. Some may consider major because it disables the device.
However, I think none of us are happy when a device is disabled.
Well, that's fair enough, but I'm calling it minor because (a) it's
temporary, (b) the
Besides, most people expect Microsoft products to be bricked from time to
time.
As Chris and Jeff noted, not a big deal to be bricked by Microsoft. It
usually doesn't last forever.
--
John DeCarlo, My Views Are My Own
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=34091576500ref=mf
Only you could take what -looks- like a fairly minor software glitch
and understand that it is actually a massive MS conspiracy. Those are some
evil, evil dudes, Tom; it is good that we have you to show us the truth.
It could have been much worse. Just think what it would have been like if
Only you could take what -looks- like a fairly minor software glitch and
understand that it is actually a massive MS conspiracy. Those are some evil,
evil dudes, Tom; it is good that we have you to show us the truth.
Thanks. Your comment is a useful Rosetta Stone for calibrating your
world to
http://coreygo.com/index.php/2008/12/31/how-to-temporarily-fix-the-zune-30s-
z2k9-woes/
Fine, except that:
1) Requires disassembly of the Zune, voiding the warrenty.
2) He reports that 1/3 of the time his procedure completely erases the
contents of the Zune.
Thanks. Your comment is a useful Rosetta Stone for calibrating your
world to mine. When you describe a total, paralyzing meltdown as a
fairly minor software glitch I see that you have a much higher
threshold of pain than I. When Apple had a similar problem with the
iPhone we called it
You may consider it minor, because they are coming out with a fix for
it. Some may consider major because it disables the device.
However, I think none of us are happy when a device is disabled.
Apple had a Christmas meltdown too. Apparently there were many more
iPhones and iTouches
Uh Tom the proper designation is Boxing Day! :-)
Lived in Canada 4.5 years and am married to one. Very familiar with it.
Stewart
At 10:49 AM 1/1/2009, you wrote:
You may consider it minor, because they are coming out with a fix for
it. Some may consider major because it disables the
http://coreygo.com/index.php/2008/12/31/how-to-temporarily-fix-the-
zune-30s-z2k9-woes/
Fine, except that:
1) Requires disassembly of the Zune, voiding the warrenty.
2) He reports that 1/3 of the time his procedure completely erases the
contents of the Zune.
A point you didn't see fit
When Apple had a similar problem with the iPhone we
called it bricking (turning our expensive toy into
the equivalent of a brick) and it was not acceptable
at all. We gave Apple hell.
And you accused them of intentionally creating the glitch to sell more
stuff. Right?
When Apple had a similar problem with the iPhone we
called it bricking (turning our expensive toy into
the equivalent of a brick) and it was not acceptable
at all. We gave Apple hell.
And you accused them of intentionally creating the glitch to sell more
stuff. Right?
Actually, that was
When Apple had a similar problem with the iPhone we
called it bricking (turning our expensive toy into
the equivalent of a brick) and it was not acceptable
at all. We gave Apple hell.
And you accused them of intentionally creating the glitch to sell more
stuff. Right?
Actually,
So, in that case, you're comparing an intentional and presumably permanent
bricking of hacked iPhones to an obviously unintentional and very temporary
Zune software bug? Apples, oranges.
No. The point of the matter is that MS created a music player who's
operation is somehow critically
You give em what for Tom! Hold on I gotta update my ipod touch...some new
software problem they are fixing, brb.
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
No. The point of the matter is that MS created a music player who's
operation is somehow critically intertwined
No. The point of the matter is that MS created a music player who's
operation is somehow critically intertwined with the number of days in
the year. I can't imagine how the number of days in the year could be
critical for the function of playing music
I'm speechless. This is simply
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
So, in that case, you're comparing an intentional and presumably permanent
bricking of hacked iPhones to an obviously unintentional and very
temporary
Zune software bug? Apples, oranges.
No. The point of the matter is that MS
I'm speechless. This is simply laughable; it appears to demonstrate a
near-total lack of knowledge of computer programming. It has nothing to do
with the playing of music.
It is precisely because I do know how to program that I'm shocked at
their sloppiness. This is the equivalent of your car
DRM probably is the answer to M$ woes in Zune2K9 debacle. It needs to be
able to know your license is current for the subscription service. Can't
have you hearing licensed music after your license has expired.
It is just like designing electronic door locks that won't open when the
building
Yeah, bad software code that affects an mp3 player for a few hours is the
same as getting locked in a building and burning to death.
Psst, Tom...it's *just* an mp3 player.
The tens of...hundreds of people with Zunes are probably ok now.
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Tom Piwowar t...@tjpa.com
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
