Linux-Advocacy Digest #9, Volume #31 Thu, 21 Dec 00 18:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Steve Mading)
Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: My pet peeve: Developers who don't furnish a complete application ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: 21 Dec 2000 22:34:17 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: In alt.destroy.microsoft Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ed Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> : Bug becomes an "issue", "an undocumented feature" or "a
:> : partially implemented feature"
:> : They got laughed at too much for that last one so
:> : now they use "issue" as in "Win2000 has 63,000
:> : issues"
:>
:> The point is, this is not Microsoft's invention. The practice of
:> calling all incidents as "issues" without classifying which are
:> bugs yet is quite common. Microsoft themselves probably didn't know
:> yet which of those issues are actual bugs at the time they made
:> that statement.
:>
:> I hate Microsoft too, but the valid arguments against it will carry
:> more weight if the frivolous ones like this are left out.
:>
: Congratulations you have fallen for the exact confusion Microsoft
: hoped you would. Check back on the article, VERY carefully. Here
: are some extracts:
: ------- EXTRACT ONE --------
: "Our customers do not want us to sell them products with over
: 63,000 potential known defects. They want these defects
: corrected," stated one of Microsoft's Windows development
: leaders, Marc Lucovsky, in the memo.
: ------- END OF EXTRACT -------
: Note the use of the word POTENTIAL KNOWN DEFECTS. Care to re-read
: that as "unclassified issues"?
Sure. Go look up "potential" in a dictionary. And, in the software
biz, "defect" does not have to mean "bug". "Defect" covers anything
wrong with the whole package deal, including bad documentation,
or bad up-front design, or actual bugs. "Defect" simply means something
wrong at the company's end rather than the user's end. The taxonomy
is like so:
"issue" - most generic. Could apply to either user problems or
vender's problems. Until it gets classified, all logged
complaints start as just 'issues'.
"defect" - a type of issue, where the problem is determined to
be on the vendor's side of things, not the user's side.
"bug" - a type of defect, where the vendor's problem is one
in the details of the code, rather than being a bad
idea in the general overall design or poor documentation.
I'm not denying that MS is spin-doctoring here, by not giving out
the figure for how many of those things are really bugs. I just
don't like the fact that so are their opponents, by taking the
assumption that ALL those problems are problems of the "bug"
variety. Take the high ground and don't drop to their level.
: ------- EXTRACT TWO ----------
: More than 21,000 "postponed" bugs, an indeterminate
: number of which Microsoft is characterising as "real
: problems." Others are requests for new functionality, and
: others reflect "plain confusion as to how something is
: supposed to work."
: More than 27,000 "BugBug" comments. These are usually
: notes to developers to make something work better or
: more efficiently. According to Microsoft, they tend to
: represent "unfinished work" or "long-forgotten problems."
: ------- END OF EXTRACT -------
: The important thing about the first paragraph is not the
: use of the word "bug". That comes from the journalist, but
: the quotes "REAL PROBLEMS" and "CONFUSION AS TO HOW SOMETHING
: IS SUPPOSED TO WORK". Are these not indicative of "bugs"
There is not enough information presented in what you quoted
to classify them. "Confusion as to how something is
supposed to work" could also be a defect in the documentation or
a dumb user problem, and have nothing to do with the software.
They *might* be bugs. They might not. There is not enough
information to tell.
: as supposed to the trivial examples you give? "BugBug" is
: Microsoft's own description of a category of these problems.
: ------- EXTRACT THREE --------
: "Bugs are inherent in computer science," she said.
: "All software ships with issues...."
: ------- END OF EXTRACT -------
: Note the change in tact from the first sentence in the use of
: the word "Bugs", to the second sentence with the substitution
: of the word "issues"?
I'm not denying the spin-doctoring. I just don't want to see
the same type of spin-doctoring done in the other direction.
It degrades advocacy to being no better than political mudslinging.
: Words by themselves, are at best ambiguous and at worst completely
: meaningless. It is the context which clarifies their meaning. Any
: one who knows Microsoft, and was honest, would not for one second
: presume that when they use the words "issues", it is a reference
: to an unclassified problems.
: The full article is from ZDNET here:
: http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/2000/6/ns-13324.html
: Remember, this is a BETA testing program, not some off-the-cuff
: responses to customer complaints of a PUBLISHED software. And as
: you can see from the article they already classified the bugs.
It doesn't matter who the users are. Regardless of whether they
are outside users or inside users doing testing, the same
terminology and often the same issue-tracking software is typically
used in most software houses. (Once some internal employee
notices something that might be wrong, he logs it into the
system - often the same system the phone calls get logged into
later when the software goes public.)
: What you have here is a redefinition of the word "issues" (as
: more reputable companies use it) and "bugs".
Yes, On BOTH sides. Not all issues are bugs.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black)
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 18:04:29 -0500
Conrad Rutherford wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Bob Hauck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:40:41 -0500, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > You'll find that the Linux (*internet surfing) desktop share is
> about
> > > > > > .003120. MS.* is about .9375222 as of October out of 554,519,878
> > > > > > samples. read/weep http://www.thecounter.com/stats/
> > > > >
> > > > > Why you think this is a good thing is what escapes a lot of us. I
> can't
> > > > > imagine it being a good thing to have one company control 93% of
> > > anything.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think we should eliminate Ford and Chrysler so that everybody
> > > > has to buy an Oldsmobile
> > >
> > > No one said anything about eliminating anyone. It's a simple reporting
> of
> > > fact that MS browsers are in use on 93% of all systems versus only about
> 0%
> > > for Linux.
> >
> > Liar
>
> You are a retard (as per your own .SIG text)
My .sig does EXACTLY that which I want it to accomplish....
So, you must be using some definition of retard with which the
rest of the English-speaking world is unfamiliar.
> but I'm waiting for you to
> actually prove me wrong since simply stating "liar" without supporting
> evidence is nothing more than a simple way to illustrate your pathetic
> stupidity
You made the assertion, therefore, the burden of proof is upon YOU.
Clue for the clueless....i merely questioned your assertion.
Put up or shut up. Prove your claim....liar.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My pet peeve: Developers who don't furnish a complete application
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 18:06:23 -0500
mlw wrote:
>
> This is one of those good/bad trade-off things about open source. We do
> not live in an ideal world.
>
> I am a software developer, and sometimes I don't do the documentation.
> The issue is that I am not as productive doing docs as I am doing
> software.
The key is: Document AS you code, not afterwards.
>
> One of the points of OSS is that people "chip in" as they see fit. You
> could have very easily updated an install or readme file to include
> information and sent it back to the developer, so that the next person
> won't have the same problems you have had.
True.
>
> --
> http://www.mohawksoft.com
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 18:08:54 -0500
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> : In alt.destroy.microsoft Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ed Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :>
> :> : Bug becomes an "issue", "an undocumented feature" or "a
> :> : partially implemented feature"
> :> : They got laughed at too much for that last one so
> :> : now they use "issue" as in "Win2000 has 63,000
> :> : issues"
> :>
> :> The point is, this is not Microsoft's invention. The practice of
> :> calling all incidents as "issues" without classifying which are
> :> bugs yet is quite common. Microsoft themselves probably didn't know
> :> yet which of those issues are actual bugs at the time they made
> :> that statement.
> :>
> :> I hate Microsoft too, but the valid arguments against it will carry
> :> more weight if the frivolous ones like this are left out.
> :>
>
> : Congratulations you have fallen for the exact confusion Microsoft
> : hoped you would. Check back on the article, VERY carefully. Here
> : are some extracts:
>
> : ------- EXTRACT ONE --------
>
> : "Our customers do not want us to sell them products with over
> : 63,000 potential known defects. They want these defects
> : corrected," stated one of Microsoft's Windows development
> : leaders, Marc Lucovsky, in the memo.
>
> : ------- END OF EXTRACT -------
>
> : Note the use of the word POTENTIAL KNOWN DEFECTS. Care to re-read
> : that as "unclassified issues"?
>
> Sure. Go look up "potential" in a dictionary. And, in the software
> biz, "defect" does not have to mean "bug". "Defect" covers anything
> wrong with the whole package deal, including bad documentation,
> or bad up-front design, or actual bugs. "Defect" simply means something
> wrong at the company's end rather than the user's end. The taxonomy
> is like so:
>
> "issue" - most generic. Could apply to either user problems or
> vender's problems. Until it gets classified, all logged
> complaints start as just 'issues'.
>
> "defect" - a type of issue, where the problem is determined to
> be on the vendor's side of things, not the user's side.
>
> "bug" - a type of defect, where the vendor's problem is one
> in the details of the code, rather than being a bad
> idea in the general overall design or poor documentation.
>
> I'm not denying that MS is spin-doctoring here, by not giving out
> the figure for how many of those things are really bugs. I just
> don't like the fact that so are their opponents, by taking the
> assumption that ALL those problems are problems of the "bug"
> variety. Take the high ground and don't drop to their level.
Historical misuse of the English language by Microshaft COMPELS
those who own an operating brain to ASSUME the worst-case scenario...
And even then with Microsharft...it's probably under-estimating the problem.
>
> : ------- EXTRACT TWO ----------
>
> : More than 21,000 "postponed" bugs, an indeterminate
> : number of which Microsoft is characterising as "real
> : problems." Others are requests for new functionality, and
> : others reflect "plain confusion as to how something is
> : supposed to work."
>
> : More than 27,000 "BugBug" comments. These are usually
> : notes to developers to make something work better or
> : more efficiently. According to Microsoft, they tend to
> : represent "unfinished work" or "long-forgotten problems."
>
> : ------- END OF EXTRACT -------
>
> : The important thing about the first paragraph is not the
> : use of the word "bug". That comes from the journalist, but
> : the quotes "REAL PROBLEMS" and "CONFUSION AS TO HOW SOMETHING
> : IS SUPPOSED TO WORK". Are these not indicative of "bugs"
>
> There is not enough information presented in what you quoted
> to classify them. "Confusion as to how something is
> supposed to work" could also be a defect in the documentation or
> a dumb user problem, and have nothing to do with the software.
> They *might* be bugs. They might not. There is not enough
> information to tell.
>
> : as supposed to the trivial examples you give? "BugBug" is
> : Microsoft's own description of a category of these problems.
>
> : ------- EXTRACT THREE --------
>
> : "Bugs are inherent in computer science," she said.
> : "All software ships with issues...."
>
> : ------- END OF EXTRACT -------
>
> : Note the change in tact from the first sentence in the use of
> : the word "Bugs", to the second sentence with the substitution
> : of the word "issues"?
>
> I'm not denying the spin-doctoring. I just don't want to see
> the same type of spin-doctoring done in the other direction.
> It degrades advocacy to being no better than political mudslinging.
>
> : Words by themselves, are at best ambiguous and at worst completely
> : meaningless. It is the context which clarifies their meaning. Any
> : one who knows Microsoft, and was honest, would not for one second
> : presume that when they use the words "issues", it is a reference
> : to an unclassified problems.
>
> : The full article is from ZDNET here:
> : http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/2000/6/ns-13324.html
>
> : Remember, this is a BETA testing program, not some off-the-cuff
> : responses to customer complaints of a PUBLISHED software. And as
> : you can see from the article they already classified the bugs.
>
> It doesn't matter who the users are. Regardless of whether they
> are outside users or inside users doing testing, the same
> terminology and often the same issue-tracking software is typically
> used in most software houses. (Once some internal employee
> notices something that might be wrong, he logs it into the
> system - often the same system the phone calls get logged into
> later when the software goes public.)
>
> : What you have here is a redefinition of the word "issues" (as
> : more reputable companies use it) and "bugs".
>
> Yes, On BOTH sides. Not all issues are bugs.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
