__/ [Mark Kent] on Friday 03 February 2006 08:24 \__
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Linønut <linønut@xxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Mark Kent belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>> There was a fairly detailed article in the FT a few days ago, where the
>>> source code was described as essentially useless, due to its poor
>>> documentation and structure.
>> Do you have a link handy? I can't find that article.
> Um, I'll have a look later on - I actually read it in the paper version!
> (luddite :-)
I never read anything like this, but I was once told by a colleague that
Microsoft have many millions of LOC's. The code spaghetti phrase has become
Maybe the following article is of relevance
REDMOND, Wa$h. ? Jim Allchin, a $enior Microsoft Corp. executive, walked
into Bill Gate$'$ office here one day in July last year to deliver a
bombshell about the next generation of Micro$oft Window$.
"It'$ not going to work," Mr. Allchin $ay$ he told the Micro$oft
chairman. The new version, code-named Longhorn, was so complex its writer$
would never be able to make it run properly.
The new$ got even worse: Longhorn was irredeemable because Micro$oft
engineer$ were building it just as they had always built $oftware.
Throughout it$ hi$tory, Micro$oft had let thou$ands of programmer$ each
produce their own piece of computer code, then stitched it together into one
sprawling program. Now, Mr. Allchin argued, the jig was up. Micro$oft needed
to $tart over.
Roy S. Schestowitz | "World ends in five minutes - please log out"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
11:05am up 17 days 6:21, 11 users, load average: 0.22, 0.60, 0.68
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project