|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
:SIGH: ( interesting that an idiot non-programer like me is about 1/2 right )
yes its hard work writting an operating system, its even harder when you have
to write one that deliberately is incompatible with software tools that your
boss thinks are competitors, certainly it would have been easier to impliment
java according to guidelines then it was to develope a batardized java, etc
etc.
kohath wrote:
> We are probably both about 1/2 right, for not only does Microsoft need to
> develop a platform which enables thousands of different products to run on
> it, the developers of the add/on componants must develop their products to
> be compatable with the MS OS. NoneTheLess, the job of MS far outweighs any
> add/on developers job, for the reasons stated above. I would submit you are
> another non-developer/programmer whom does not have any idea of what goes
> into developing hardware/software, but wishes to make an opinion on the
> subject without doing any homework, for if you were you would know that the
> statement you have made below makes little sense, if you take the time to
> think about it.
>
> Kohath
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Hanson <hantran@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxx <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wednesday, November 10, 1999 9:58 AM
> Subject: Re: GEN: MS/JUSTICE DEPT RULING?
>
> >an interesting post but you've gotten one thing exactly backwards which
> skews
> >your argument 180 degress
> >Win 98 doesn't have to "be compatable with thousands of different
> products,
> >hardware and software" THOUSANDS OF DIFFERENT PRODUCTS , HARDWARE AND
> SOFTWARE
> >HAVE TO BE MADE COMPATIBLE TO WIN 98.
> >
> >kohath wrote:
> >
> >> Computers, and computer software, are extremly complex. The reason there
> >> are so many incompatabilities between software programs and hardware. If
> >> WIn 98 is bad now, wait until there are 300 versions out there to choose
> >> from. Will this hardware work with this version, will this program work
> >> with this version. It's bad enough as it is, now. Ever hear of the
> rumor
> >> game, whereby a line is formed of 10 people, a rumor is whispered in the
> >> first persons ear, and see what the last person heard and compare it to
> the
> >> original. Software development, especially an OS as complex as Win 98,
> is a
> >> lot like that. When you have thousands of computer programers working on
> a
> >> product such as Win 98, each having their own idea of how something
> should
> >> be done, competition to get the biggest raise, (so my idea is better than
> >> yours, who cares if it makes the product better), a majority of the
> >> programmers having no business being programmers, you end up with a
> product
> >> that is full of bugs. Couple that with the fact that their are millions
> >> more programmers/wannabe programmers designing the software/hardware to
> >> complement the OS, and you have a recipe for disaster. Actually, I am
> >> suprised that Win95, 98, NT work, given the difficulties described above,
> as
> >> well as they do.
> >>
> >> The amount of hours spent in developing a product such as Win 98 is not
> >> measured in a few programmers working for a few weeks to put out the new
> >> operating system. There are probably millions of man hours invested in
> the
> >> development of Win 98. Comparing a program that displays your quotes on
> the
> >> computer for you like Windows on Wall Street or Trade Station to WIn 98
> is
> >> like comparing the size of an Ant to an Elephant. There is no
> comparison,
> >> for all practical purposes. Win 98 must be compatable with thousands of
> >> different products, hardware and software. To expect all bugs to be
> removed
> >> from a software program that has 25+ million lines of code is rediculus.
> It
> >> will never happen, no matter how much time a company spends debbuging
> it's
> >> products. Actually, for the price of $90 for Win 98, that is cheap,
> >> compared to other monopolies out there. Take your quote service, you pay
> >> more than $90 each MONTH for quotes. And check out the price for TS or
> WOW.
> >> Neither of these programs is 100th the program Win98 is. Why the
> rediculus
> >> price. Those guys make BIll Gates look like a boy scout saving for his
> >> first bycicle. IMO they should be around $3 (for the quotes), to be fair
> to
> >> all, but, what's fair in the corporate world. Look at the automobiles,
> >> $30,000 for a new car? That's rediculus. How about %60 of your income
> >> every year to help fund the biggest monopoly of all time in U.S. History?
> >>
> >> .
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Brent <brente@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: Real Traders Forum <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Earl Adamy
> >> <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Sunday, November 07, 1999 3:05 PM
> >> Subject: Re: GEN: MS/JUSTICE DEPT RULING?
> >>
> >> > This is a very complicated issue. Some have said that a breakup of big
> M
> >> > would hurt the whole US economy. They said the same about other
> companies
> >> > though.
> >> >
> >> > I just have a few thoughts (questions) about this puzzle. Why hasn't
> there
> >> > been any other OS come along to do battle with big M? Say a company in
> the
> >> > far east wanted to compete. Couldn't they make a knock off OS and sell
> it
> >> > for $49.95 (cheaper) just like they did with cars, TV's, video
> >> recorders...
> >> > etc? Why didn't Apple, IBM, Xerox, etc. wake up in time?
> >> >
> >> > That's about it.
> >> >
> >> > Brent
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
|