Reg versus Premium Fuel experiament in 09 PT Cruiser
in [Cars]
|
From: Joe Pfeiffer on 7 Nov 2009 19:09 "hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> writes: > "Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message > news:hd4shd$bbv$1(a)panix2.panix.com... > >> People who get badly-designed and badly-tested code from the lowest bidder >> are indeed a problem. > > With all due respect, Scott, we get badly designed and poorly debugged > code even > from MicroSoft. You say it like you're disagreeing. -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
From: hls on 7 Nov 2009 19:18 "Joe Pfeiffer" <pfeiffer(a)cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in message news:1bd43tq3lp.fsf(a)snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net... > "hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> writes: > >> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message >> news:hd4shd$bbv$1(a)panix2.panix.com... >> >>> People who get badly-designed and badly-tested code from the lowest >>> bidder >>> are indeed a problem. >> >> With all due respect, Scott, we get badly designed and poorly debugged >> code even >> from MicroSoft. > > You say it like you're disagreeing. Microsoft was thought to be the cream of the crop by many people. It isnt, and they arent even the lowest bidder. If software had the same sort of exposure that medicine had, these people would perfect their crappy code before maneuvering people into a position that they practically are forced to buy it.
From: Scott Dorsey on 7 Nov 2009 21:38 hls <hls(a)nospam.nix> wrote: > >"Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message >news:hd4shd$bbv$1(a)panix2.panix.com... > >> People who get badly-designed and badly-tested code from the lowest bidder >> are indeed a problem. > >With all due respect, Scott, we get badly designed and poorly debugged code >even >from MicroSoft. You mean "especially" from Microsoft, don't you? >Windows Vista sucks buffalo whangs. Yes, but that's a different thing. That's what you get when the marketing department designs software. The end result is something that looks really nice, but has major compromises underneath to make it look nice. Actually making an operating system that has normal operating system features is not a priority... look how long it took for Microsoft to come up with pre-emptive multitasking, as used by real operating systems since the early seventies. >But I know what you mean.. Our VP in charge of communications cut a deal >several >years ago with Lotus for our corporate software. They paid $50 per user to >Lotus, >and this was some of the worst software I ever saw. After several years of >bitching >and groaning, the Lotus software upgrades brought it into respectable >performance. >Then, the Information Services jerks cancelled it and bought Microsoft. >This caused >a LOT of older data, reports, etc to move quickly to incompatible formats. Businesses look on computer systems as expenses, they don't think so much about what they are getting for their money. Consequently you see a lot of this kind of thing, but let me say it is MUCH worse when businesses which are not technology-driven contract out for custom software. Sometimes, if they have one smart person in charge of the contract, it works out really well. Most of the time it does not. >I have one personal computer running Linux and using Open Office. I may >never buy >another Microsoft based OS or bit of software if I can help it. I had a very bad support experience with Microsoft in 1978 and have not used any products of theirs since. I'm not a big Linux fan, and my number one complaint with Linux is the same as my number one complaint with Microsoft: poor documentation of internals. At least with Linux you can read the source code if you have to, but you shouldn't have to. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
From: Scott Dorsey on 7 Nov 2009 21:42 hls <hls(a)nospam.nix> wrote: > >If software had the same sort of exposure that medicine had, these people >would >perfect their crappy code before maneuvering people into a position that >they >practically are forced to buy it. Just ask your doctor about cholesterol-lowering drugs. Microsoft isn't the only outfit pushing inadequate and untested products on the market. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
From: Joe Pfeiffer on 7 Nov 2009 22:35
"hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> writes: > "Joe Pfeiffer" <pfeiffer(a)cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in message > news:1bd43tq3lp.fsf(a)snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net... >> "hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> writes: >> >>> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message >>> news:hd4shd$bbv$1(a)panix2.panix.com... >>> >>>> People who get badly-designed and badly-tested code from the >>>> lowest bidder >>>> are indeed a problem. >>> >>> With all due respect, Scott, we get badly designed and poorly debugged >>> code even >>> from MicroSoft. >> >> You say it like you're disagreeing. > > Microsoft was thought to be the cream of the crop by many people. It > isnt, and they > arent even the lowest bidder. > > If software had the same sort of exposure that medicine had, these > people would > perfect their crappy code before maneuvering people into a position > that they > practically are forced to buy it. Sorry, I guess I forgot a smiley. I've got exactly two applications that force me to run Windows in a virtual machine environment: a schematic diagram drawing program and PCB layout program needed to submit work to expresspcb.com, an extremely inexpensive source for small numbers of custom PC boards. Anybody got a comparable source that will take a gerber file? -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin) |