[TenTec] Re: Jupiter firmware problems...NOT! (SO!... )

[Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX]

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Howard smith 
  To: Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX ; tentec at contesting.com 
  Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 6:06 PM
  Subject: Re: [TenTec] Re: Jupiter firmware problems...NOT! (SO!... )


  Hi Bob,
  I want to disagree with what you said in a recent post:

    "I'd agree. I recall loading and running Windows 1.01 and all the revisions 
    that followed. Just recently I've changed to Windows XP from ME from 2000. 
    Still have bugs that I recall were in V 3.1. Also use NT on our network 
    servers. More bugs. Just the nature of software in my opinion."


  I don't really think this is the nature of all software.  I think it is the nature of Windows software.  Here are a couple of examples the I know of which have well written, reliable software sets.

  The Engine Control Modules (ECM) used by all of the auto makers are all microprocessor based, and their software does not appear to have the magnitude of bugs that windows software does.  If they did, the highways would be littered with the pistons, rods, etc, that came out of the engines when the software failed.


  Oh, I see your point.  Look at it this way, the ECM has sensor input from say 15 to 25 sensors.  Always the same 15 to 25.  Add a human intervention to the chain and you'd see bugs.  The sensors are known variables with set limits.  The human input..........well.  A different story.


  The second example is the software that is used on the shuttle missions.  That software has a documented error rate that is something less than 5 bugs per 1 million lines of source code.  I think the big difference here is the fact that the software engineers meet with the astronauts to design the software.  Everybody there seems to know that a software bug could mean that some of the people in the meeting may not be returning from the mission.  That is a rather large incentive to get it right the first (and only!) time.

  It's been suggested that Tentec offer updates and enhancement for say $20 to $50 per release.  Wonder if NASA astronauts would want to ride on a $50 update.  I realize the systems are vastly different and more complex in the case with NASA, but the principle is the same.

  My point is that software does not have to be done poorly.  It can be done so it is reliable.  I have never understood why the Information Technology community has not taken Microsoft to task over the quality issue.  The IT people are the ones who suffer the loss of productivity as they are always tracking down some new bug.

  You are correct in that software does not have to be done poorly.  As to Microsoft, business wise, it's a feature vs time vs cost issue.  It's a triangle any way you strech it.   It can be done so that it is reliable but again I enlist the 6 month rule.  Be first and take your chances.  Wait 6 mos and you get a reasonably solid package.
  Bob



  Howard Smith, WA9AXQ
   





--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---