Re: Polite software (was RE: [newbie] Is this a joke?)
I agree more or less. I treat my Windows box as a reliable for lack of a better word. Linux is the hot rod I tweak and play with. I am told, repeatedly by hardcore Linux users, that their Linux box is their mainstain over Windows. To each their own but so far as work goes I am still chained to Windows but play freely within Linux. Picked up an Apple since it does a better job of video editing than Linux and Windows combined. From all of these suckers I keep coming back to Linux to play and learn. Honesly, I find it more enjoyable to pick it apart and see what happens than I do with Mac or Windows. My two cents. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: Polite software (was RE: [newbie] Is this a joke?)
The hardware drives the software. I am an X-Electronics employee. Greedy, time equals money, perfection a must. QUALITY suffers. Many a time items are shipped off to market that are not what they claim to be. A mistake made in a production line. A deal made with the next in line, (no charge). A niche made in the market or packaged in a box that it really does not belong to. It is a game of chance by the consumer. Mark Johnson wrote: Do you think if someone or a group could provide a framework dedicated to supporting this scenario it could help open-source developers and users in terms of both time and money? Or do you think it wouldn't have a very significant effect on these inherent hurdles? Do you think such a framework is even feasible? Are most open-source developers self trained or do most have some sort of educational background like a university or tech school? (Not that there are probably too many universities or tech school that teach good software engineering) I wonder if a payed subscription to this type of framework would be effective. Would people pay to subscribe to a automatic trouble shooting repository. I'm guessing not... -Original Message- From: civileme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mark Johnson; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: Polite software (was RE: [newbie] Is this a joke?) This is not a gripe, just an observation, but it seems like for most people (including me) their linux system is usually in a constant state of broken-ness, or in some way always marginally handicapped. Why is that? I realize that software is difficult to write just in general and operating systems and things like desktops are even more difficult, but it appears that there is a fundamental problem with how software deals with exceptions. Well, the real story is that we don't spend enough money on software. If you want good error messages, it has to come from the programmer. The programmer needs time and training for this to happen. Right now, we are against a wall with people regularly working 14-hour days just to get a distro to you. Bugs cannot be solved because the model of inspection is proven not to work, by no less than Microsoft where every programmer is shadowed by a tester. Proper design is needed so the job gets done right the first time--then the level of bugfixes will be lower, the interaction of various pieces of software will be lesser, and the initial product will be much better. This requires training, and this training is _VERY_ expensive. Take 30 programmers out of action for 3 weeks to train them, make another three weeks by magic for them to plan out the activities of the distro, add another 5 weeks to get the text of error messages meaningful and right and translated into 40 odd languages, and pay for a couple of trainers (peanuts compared to the lost time expense) then somehow by magic keep up with the competition while you are missing half your between distro programmer time. It is expensive to have good programmers. We have the best because many are here because this is free software, but still the amount of time required for this job is enormous and most work grueling hours. So it is expensive. So if enough people really want more informative error messages and better wizards and tools, it can be done. The obstacle is really cost. Civileme Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: Polite software (was RE: [newbie] Is this a joke?)
On Wednesday 19 September 2001 18:18, you wrote: Do you think if someone or a group could provide a framework dedicated to supporting this scenario it could help open-source developers and users in terms of both time and money? Or do you think it wouldn't have a very significant effect on these inherent hurdles? Do you think such a framework is even feasible? Are most open-source developers self trained or do most have some sort of educational background like a university or tech school? (Not that there are probably too many universities or tech school that teach good software engineering) I wonder if a payed subscription to this type of framework would be effective. Would people pay to subscribe to a automatic trouble shooting repository. I'm guessing not... Software engineering of the type required for a whole distro simply isn't taught. The production of such requires small-group dynamics and use of statisitcs and consensus-building tools so everyone can feel creative and a winner. Without that, you might as well try to herd cats. Civileme -Original Message- From: civileme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mark Johnson; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: Polite software (was RE: [newbie] Is this a joke?) This is not a gripe, just an observation, but it seems like for most people (including me) their linux system is usually in a constant state of broken-ness, or in some way always marginally handicapped. Why is that? I realize that software is difficult to write just in general and operating systems and things like desktops are even more difficult, but it appears that there is a fundamental problem with how software deals with exceptions. Well, the real story is that we don't spend enough money on software. If you want good error messages, it has to come from the programmer. The programmer needs time and training for this to happen. Right now, we are against a wall with people regularly working 14-hour days just to get a distro to you. Bugs cannot be solved because the model of inspection is proven not to work, by no less than Microsoft where every programmer is shadowed by a tester. Proper design is needed so the job gets done right the first time--then the level of bugfixes will be lower, the interaction of various pieces of software will be lesser, and the initial product will be much better. This requires training, and this training is _VERY_ expensive. Take 30 programmers out of action for 3 weeks to train them, make another three weeks by magic for them to plan out the activities of the distro, add another 5 weeks to get the text of error messages meaningful and right and translated into 40 odd languages, and pay for a couple of trainers (peanuts compared to the lost time expense) then somehow by magic keep up with the competition while you are missing half your between distro programmer time. It is expensive to have good programmers. We have the best because many are here because this is free software, but still the amount of time required for this job is enormous and most work grueling hours. So it is expensive. So if enough people really want more informative error messages and better wizards and tools, it can be done. The obstacle is really cost. Civileme Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: Polite software (was RE: [newbie] Is this a joke?)
Do you think if someone or a group could provide a framework dedicated to supporting this scenario it could help open-source developers and users in terms of both time and money? Or do you think it wouldn't have a very significant effect on these inherent hurdles? Do you think such a framework is even feasible? Are most open-source developers self trained or do most have some sort of educational background like a university or tech school? (Not that there are probably too many universities or tech school that teach good software engineering) I wonder if a payed subscription to this type of framework would be effective. Would people pay to subscribe to a automatic trouble shooting repository. I'm guessing not... -Original Message- From: civileme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mark Johnson; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: Polite software (was RE: [newbie] Is this a joke?) This is not a gripe, just an observation, but it seems like for most people (including me) their linux system is usually in a constant state of broken-ness, or in some way always marginally handicapped. Why is that? I realize that software is difficult to write just in general and operating systems and things like desktops are even more difficult, but it appears that there is a fundamental problem with how software deals with exceptions. Well, the real story is that we don't spend enough money on software. If you want good error messages, it has to come from the programmer. The programmer needs time and training for this to happen. Right now, we are against a wall with people regularly working 14-hour days just to get a distro to you. Bugs cannot be solved because the model of inspection is proven not to work, by no less than Microsoft where every programmer is shadowed by a tester. Proper design is needed so the job gets done right the first time--then the level of bugfixes will be lower, the interaction of various pieces of software will be lesser, and the initial product will be much better. This requires training, and this training is _VERY_ expensive. Take 30 programmers out of action for 3 weeks to train them, make another three weeks by magic for them to plan out the activities of the distro, add another 5 weeks to get the text of error messages meaningful and right and translated into 40 odd languages, and pay for a couple of trainers (peanuts compared to the lost time expense) then somehow by magic keep up with the competition while you are missing half your between distro programmer time. It is expensive to have good programmers. We have the best because many are here because this is free software, but still the amount of time required for this job is enormous and most work grueling hours. So it is expensive. So if enough people really want more informative error messages and better wizards and tools, it can be done. The obstacle is really cost. Civileme Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: Polite software (was RE: [newbie] Is this a joke?)
This is not a gripe, just an observation, but it seems like for most people (including me) their linux system is usually in a constant state of broken-ness, or in some way always marginally handicapped. Why is that? I realize that software is difficult to write just in general and operating systems and things like desktops are even more difficult, but it appears that there is a fundamental problem with how software deals with exceptions. From my point of view when I install a piece of software and it breaks something that's ok -- i understand things happen, but what infuriates me is when the software says, in effect, nope can't do it. Then I have to spend a week pouring through documentation until usually I give up because I just can't afford to spend that much time tweaking my system, in what seems to be, in vain and I just leave that part broken. It seems to me that the software should know or at least guess better than me about why it can't run and could possibly offer some suggestions. (I realize there is syslog and log files, which are meant for programmers and sysadmins to decipher and not for common users). A lot of the time I find software complains that it can work because of a permission problem, I wish it would just tell me that. In this day with most linux users having internet access why not develop an online problem resolution module that can be plugged into most software projects so when a problem occurs the software itself can query a trouble shooting database to help the user out. Possibly, if embedding this type of functionality is not possible in the actual software an external tool that references this database would work. There is a wealth of information burried in newsgroup and mailing list archives but it's very hard to extract and very time consuming. If this knowledge base could be (albeit slowly) uploaded to a trouble shooting database in about 2 or 3 years there would be a nice repository of info. Things like bugzilla and it's cousins are nice but a lot of work is put on the user to know how to find stuff. This is troubling because the software (i.e. the programmer) knows better than the user, why can't the software trouble shoot itself? It would be great if after you installed the lastest distribution of Mandrake a tool (built-in?) is provided that it would automatically check Mandrake's errata database and synch your system against it. Why not? A lot of work, but certainly doable. When the ordinary user community bellyaches that linux is too hard the linux community bellyaches back about how users are dumb and they (the Lusers) should be more savvy about computer things. My position is if linux software requires a more savvy user, linux software should coach users into this state of enlightenment. There is too much secret knowledge just about computers in general and even more surrounding linux. We all don't have time to become sysadmins and programmers; the time is shortly approaching when linux should recognize this fact. (ps: sorry, I guess this turned into a gripe -- but with all the best intentions and love for Mandrake and Linux, mind you!) Well, the real story is that we don't spend enough money on software. If you want good error messages, it has to come from the programmer. The programmer needs time and training for this to happen. Right now, we are against a wall with people regularly working 14-hour days just to get a distro to you. Bugs cannot be solved because the model of inspection is proven not to work, by no less than Microsoft where every programmer is shadowed by a tester. Proper design is needed so the job gets done right the first time--then the level of bugfixes will be lower, the interaction of various pieces of software will be lesser, and the initial product will be much better. This requires training, and this training is _VERY_ expensive. Take 30 programmers out of action for 3 weeks to train them, make another three weeks by magic for them to plan out the activities of the distro, add another 5 weeks to get the text of error messages meaningful and right and translated into 40 odd languages, and pay for a couple of trainers (peanuts compared to the lost time expense) then somehow by magic keep up with the competition while you are missing half your between distro programmer time. It is expensive to have good programmers. We have the best because many are here because this is free software, but still the amount of time required for this job is enormous and most work grueling hours. So it is expensive. So if enough people really want more informative error messages and better wizards and tools, it can be done. The obstacle is really cost. Civileme Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
