=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
This E-mail is Sponsored by: Small Dog Electronics
--> Specializing in New & Factory Refurbished Apple computers <--
Surf to <http://www.smalldog.com> Check out our daily specials!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=567
Software bugs: Ready to pay for more?
By ron carlson, Insanely Great Mac
June 25th 2002
A government study reveals that more attention to detail earlier in the development
process could yield big savings
A study released by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
estimates that software bugs cost the US economy $59.5 billion annually (0.6 percent
of GDP). More than half of the costs are borne by software users and the remainder by
software developers/vendors NIST says.
The study also found that, although all errors cannot be eliminated, more than a third
of these costs, or about $22.2 billion, could be eliminated by using improved testing.
Currently, over half of all errors are not found until "downstream" in the development
process or after buyers have purchased and begun using NIST found.
Further, as we all know, vendors knowingly ship apps that have nasty bugs right out of
the box. It''s often the case that updates, upgrades, service packs, etc. are made
available before, concurrently or shortly software actually ships.
Shocking?
Although $60 billion is by no means a small figure, my gut reaction is that the NIST
report only scratches the surface. No, I don''t have any figures to back this up.
Apparently, the NIST study included only the costs of the bugs found in "discreet"
software -- i.e. Office, Photoshop, Windoze, etc. Therefore, the costs they estimate
are only one component of the overall costs of buggy software.
The recent story of a frustrated Minnesota man and the Gateway he bought for his
daughter is illustrative on this point:
"Since January, Gary Wilke has felt more than a little frustrated with his daughter�s
$2,600 computer.
"He took it back to the store he purchased it from -- five times.
"There�s been a new hard drive installed, a four-hour home visit from a computer
technician and problems such as no sound and the inability to ''burn'' CDs, said
Wilke, N512 Sonny Court, Appleton.
"The computer still wouldn''t boot up when he got it home from the shop Friday.
"When he went back Monday, he took the machine and told the staff he would take care
of it.
"He put the computer processing unit in the foyer of the store, went to his car, got
what witnesses described as a ''large sledgehammer'' and pummeled it." -- Appleton
Post-Cresent
(Mr. Wilke was later arrested at his home for the outburst -- I think it''s utterly
galling that the store had the complete lack of face, scrupples, whatever to seek his
incarceration.)
Perhaps this was purely a hardware problem (assuming firmware didn''t play a role).
Perhaps it simply is the story of one incompetently run Gateway store. Perhaps this is
the story of one isolated demon PC from hell? Perhaps not.
The horror, the horror...
What will be the final cost for Mr. Wilke''s odessy? US$10,000? That doesn''t seem too
much of a stretch when you add up he and his daughter''s time, ''emotional distress,''
lost productivity, court costs, technician time, parts, [etc.], does it?
Now add the costs of solving the underlying problems that led to Mr. Wilke''s PC rage
(Can we actually put on a figure on it -- the cascading software/firmware/hardware
problems, an under-staffed/trained support program, crap parts, crap software, etc.?)
Multiply this stellar figure by another astronomical number (think millions) for all
people out there like Mr. Wilke but choose not to act out or merely take it lying down
that we''ll never hear of, and will never be counted.
Granted, not everyone who''s been tooled by the computer industry can claim $10,000 --
some more, most less -- but the picture of an industry run amuk is clear.
Moreover, what of the hardware makers liability and I''m not just talking about
Gateway?
Do you think PC problems have contributed and/or caused the deaths of people in
hospitals? If not, imagine a politically astute yet technically incompetent PC idiot
sys admin running the show at say ''Mercy General'' or whatever hospital(s) closest to
you. What price do we put on the dead?
Now, turn this example on its head and ask how many hospitals (roads, schools, school
lunch programs, family planning clinics, environmental clean ups or B2 bombers for
that matter) could be built and staffed (and people helped) with just NIST''s $22.2
billion estimated recoverable costs if companies and programmers paid attention to
details?
Am I exagerating and/or over generalizing? No and yes. Am I out of my depth?
Certainly. However, I still think it overwhelmingly likely that $60 billion is just a
portion of the real cost software problems cause. Moreover, NIST''s estimate is just a
portion of the total costs represented by "feasibly" preventable computer bugs --
software, firmware, hardware, support.
Pretzel logic, hidden costs
One of the NIST report''s underlying principles is "Software consumers choose which
software product to purchase by maximizing a profit function that contains several
parameters subject to a budget constraint."
Does this presumption (though probably necessary for the purposes of the NIST report)
seem falacious at face value? Really, how many people "choose" Windoze? How many
people choose which software to use with digital cameras? How much choice do people
really have? It''s sort of like saying people born and raised in Yemen choose Islam.
How much choice do they really have?
Look at the shit Mac users take for not "choosing" Windozes. How much choice is there
really?
I will posit that people over the short term people are a.) mostly passive, and tend
to b.) accept what they are told and c.) take what they are offered with little
thought.
That people are passive needs no further exposition here. In this case what people are
told is that it''s a Windoze world. What they are offered is Windoze (95 percent) and
software based on that operating system.
Assuming that we all agree that a.) their is little real choice and b.) Windoze is a
multi-billion dollar cacophany of cludges and marketing hype a point by Gary Chapman,
director of the 21st Century Project at the University of Texas (quoted by NIST)
really eludicates just how costly the current environment is.
Chapman noted that "repeated experiences with software glitches tend to narrow one''s
use of computers to [the] familiar and routine. Studies have shown that most users
rely on less than 10 percent of the features of common programs as Microsoft Word or
Netscape Communicator." (Barron, 2000)
''You can''t use it and we''re not responsible for your problems'' seems to be the
message software and computer vendors are giving us. Yes, Mac users generally fair
better in this equation, but we are far from immune.
Diminishing returns
Why don''t computer software (and hardware) companies fix the problems? Have you ever
read a software license? Because they don''t have to. We don''t hold them repsonsible.
The status quo is you don''t own the software you pay for, but you do own the problems
it creates.
The NIST report, however, puts it more blandly:
"In actuality, many factors contribute to the quality issues facing the software
industry. These include marketing strategies, limited liability by software vendors,
and decreasing returns to testing and debugging."
That''s a rather benign way of saying the needs of the few (the computer industry)
outweigh the needs of the many. The computer industry is maturing rapidly and the
laissez-faire attitude of the past needs to change. The short term is over and people
need to get what they pay for not just pay for what''s offered.
The time has come to take a serious look at why such a high percentage of Windoze
boxes shipped crap out several times a day. It''s time to take a serious look at why
OS X arrived at least one year before it was ready (yes, except for a relative lack of
software X is greatly superior to Classic, but that isn''t the point).
Also, we need to look at why Intel, etc. can ship processors that have known math
and/or other "errata" without blushing. We need to understand why we purchase high-end
GeForce 4 AGP cards from Apple that don''t ship with proper drivers.
When the buying stops...
There''s a public-service commercial produced by the World Wildlife Fund that runs on
many TV stations here in Taiwan featuring action-hero Jacky Chan. The message he
enunciates is simple -- when people stop buying products made from the bones, organs,
etc. of endangered species (rhinos, tigers, bear, etc.) as well as the live animals
themselves the poachers will stop killing and trafficking in those animals.
This example is quite relevant to the present case -- software companies pull in
hundreds of billions of dollars ($180 billion in the US alone) by selling us crap.
They can''t sell what we won''t buy. The bugs will stop when the buying stops.
Overall, market forces are likely the best path to forcing change. However, some
legislation will also likely be necessary to force change (think standards and
anti-trust measures).
Deciding on what those measures will be and educating people to stop passively
accepting third-rate garbage as the status quo are entirely different matters.
What''s your take?
Post your comments at:
http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=567
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Copyright (c) 2002 Insanely Great Mac. All rights reserved. This article
may not be republished in part or whole without explicit written
permission from Insanely Great Mac.
Brought to you by Insanely Great Mac <http://www.insanely-great.com/>
To SUBSCRIBE - send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject
subscribe macnews
To UNSUBSCRIBE - send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject
unsubscribe macnews
Subscription problems/questions please email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
