Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Microsoft Development Model

  • Subject: Re: Microsoft Development Model
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 05:06:13 +0000
  • Newsgroups: uk.legal
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / MCC / Manchester University
  • References: <dk2gpn$1kop$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk> <4364d3f5$0$15063$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net> <8ot9m153uq5a5jq8v656ee5fmhacqudmta@news.kempston.net> <4365071f$0$15062$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net> <dk4015$214q$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk> <dk6vaj$13nj$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk> <80966.2453676@crumhorn.org>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [marc_CH] on Tuesday 01 November 2005 22:29 \__

> In article <dk6vaj$13nj$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote...
>> >> The news got even worse: Longhorn was irredeemable because Microsoft
>> >> engineers were building it just as they had always built software.
>> >> Throughout its history, Microsoft had let thousands of programmers each
>> >> produce their own piece of computer code, then stitched it together
>> >> into one sprawling program.
>> >
>> > That's how *all* non-trivial software is written, dingbat.
>> Watch you mouth please. These were not my words. They came from an
>> article, which I happen to agree with.
> It's your agreement with which I am taking issue. How do you think large
> software projects are written? How do you think large software projects
> *should* be written?

Okay, fair enough.

Software  should  be written to become more cohesive by  using  specifica-
tions,  use cases and smarter ahead-planning. If an operating system  per-
mitted  access and full control to any hacker in the world, something  had
definitely  gone rotten. If even a patch was incomplete, it is then negli-
>> Microsoft often portray the Linux development 'model' as one which
>> involves many 'cowboys' building standalone components. Prior to this
>> revelation, it was assumed that Microsoft used their vast resources to
>> build software in a more principled manner rather than compose 'code
>> spaghetti'.
> Where do Microsoft 'often portray' this about Linux?

Public speaking and word-of-mouth can be just as damaging as one would ex-
pect. While it's true that several obscure applications have been coded in
somebody's  garage, the core (kernel) is carefully administered and tested
by professionals. That is not what anti-Linux campaigns would have you be-
lieve though.

Yesterday,  for  the first time in ages, the extent of the zombie  attacks
seems to have decreased. I hope it's not merely a one-off.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index