--- In [email protected], "Steve Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Which to me as the user was the elegance. I didn't know it was a mess > under the covers as all of that was hidden from me. Other products > (MQSI for instance) felt the other way around. Not only was the > implementation almost certainly horrible but all of that horror was > exposed to me as the end user. > > Alfa Romeo's in the 90s are a good example of this, nice interface and > for the first six months they are wonderful, MQSeries like. Then > after then they start exposing the horror of their electrics directly > to me and it becomes awful like MQSI.
If you treated Alfa engines with respect (i.e. run them in carefully, warm them up properly, keep well tuned etc.) you could get a lot of exhilirating performance out of them for some time. The electrics certainly were a problem. Try Autodelta in Park Royal. Jano always respects the cars' architecture, but he knows how to improve on the design..... Mind you, the engines looked good as well as being mechanically very well designed. The acoustic aesthetics were rewarding, especially when enhanced with a good straight-through exhaust. A problem with modern FIAT-era Alfas is that they have to use FIAT front wheel drive platforms. This is a good example of making the best of defective architecture. They do look good. My 75 3.0 litre had superb architecture, varied quality design (enhanced by Jano) and bizarre aesthetics. The important thing was that they got the layout and architecture right. I think it is fair to say this applies to most disciplines, although obviously design and execution are also critical. Gervas > > Steve > > > > > 2008/6/3 Mike Glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Steve, > > > > I was (incidentally) involved in porting MQSeries to a new Unix > > platform back in the late '90s and if you'd seen any of the source > > code then the last thing you would describe it as is "elegant"! In > > fact, I was quite shocked at what a complex mess it all was. > > > > That said, sometimes a messy implementation can be hidden by a simple > > interface... > > > > -Mike Glendinning. > > > > --- In [email protected], "Steve Jones" > > <jones.steveg@> wrote: > >> > >> Cheap, Simple (very simple) and connects anything to anywhere. Does > >> clustering, load-balancing, failover and the config is incredibly > >> simple. > >> > >> Despite finding a fundamental bug in the AIX implementation (to do > >> with Java and shared memory numbers) I've never found a piece of > >> software that took less time to design and worked more effectively > > in > >> every situation. Other systems are more feature rich and have more > >> bells, but if you want to connect a bunch of mainframes, AS400s, > > Unix, > >> Windows and Linux boxes... lob in the MA0C support pack and you've > > got > >> a decent pub/sub broker as well. > >> > >> One fundamental bug is pretty good in my experience of software > >> products, and to be fair it was fixed within a few days and that was > >> because we were pushing the boundaries slightly. > >> > >> MQSI however.... > >> > >> Steve > >> > >> > >> 2008/6/2 Rob Eamon <reamon@>: > >> > --- In [email protected], "Steve > > Jones" > >> > <jones.steveg@> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >> Yup... in the same way that the Edsel or Delorian did ;) > >> >> > >> >> MQSeries.... now THAT is software elegance. > >> > > >> > MQSeries? Blech. > >> > > >> > -Rob > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >
