Re: out in web comics land...
Kent Paul Dolan
> Enable Full Crash Dump.
> Send the resulting .dmp files here.
> And I'll tell you which hardware driver on
> your system is causing your crashes.
That is information in which I have a profound
disinterest.
The reasons _I_ should be doing for no
compensation the job Microsoft SQA _should have
done_ before the product was ever released, just
one more time?
Anyway, most of the problems with MS-Windows are
not "hardware driver" problems, but faults from
poor software design because stuff that has no
business running with core privileges is
nevertheless stuffed that far down in the
operating system. I have this on authority
directly from one of the people who put it
there, and was told to do so for "performance
reasons" at the expense of bad quality.
Was your seeming claim to work for Microsoft in
SQA true? If so:
Your product lack of quality is the result of
you choosing which quality battles to win, as
management pursuaded you was the only way you
would stay employed, rather than you
understanding that to be eligible to work in
SQA, you have to win *every last one of them*.
> My XP system here has not crashed one time
> since I bought the pieces and put it together
> well over a year and a half ago.
I get that a lot, mostly from MS-Word users who
play Freecell a lot. Since that seems to be a
home computer about which you're bragging,
that's you.
So, you don't use your OS to do any useful or
challenging work, or your experience would be
otherwise. Big whoop.
> I've seen just as many crashes in Linux ...
Suuuure you have. Instead, this is entirely
typical of *nix proformance:
uptime
4:38am up 234 day(s), 1:25,
8 users, load average: 0.30, 0.38, 0.45
> Mister big-shot smarty-pants ex-VMS guy.
> You should've stuck with VMS instead
> of migrating to such an inferior OS.
Yes, I've programmed in VMS, among a few dozen
operating systems. [I've programmed in MS-DOS,
too, from 1.0 to 6.x, which were much superior to
any version of MS-Windows.]
However, operating systems are for sissies.
I started my computing career on an IBM 1620.
Punch cards, plug boards patch panel controls,
typewriter output, wire hand threaded through
core memory with each bit the diameter of a
pencil eraser.
xanthian.
Rev. 11D Meow!
"Kent Paul Dolan" <xant...@well.com> wroted...
> Rev. 11D Meow! wrote:
>
>> Enable Full Crash Dump.
>> Send the resulting .dmp files here.
>> And I'll tell you which hardware driver on
>> your system is causing your crashes.
>
> That is information in which I have a profound
> disinterest.
>
Fine, mister Biggest Head In The Universe.
Your gripes against Windows, Microsoft,
and Software Test Engineers is henceforth moot.
You're either part of the problem
or part of the solution, boofdoi.
There is no middle ground
when it comes to SQA,
as you erroneously label it.
such a waste of fertilizer...
mushrooms go poofter in Kent's head.
Kent is not only a cross-dresser,
he is also a pedophile.
Rev. 11D Meow!
> compensation the job Microsoft SQA _should have
> done_ before the product was ever released, just
> one more time?
>
Show us your Perfect Software, 'Kent'.
I'll show you at least 20 bugs in it
in less that half an hour.
whiny baby 'Kent' monkeys need not apply.
no wonder Kent's Top Secret clearance
was reduced to Secret
then no clearance at all.
no guts
no glory
eh, boofdoi?
Rev. 11D Meow!
> not "hardware driver" problems, but faults from
> poor software design because stuff that has no
> business running with core privileges is
> nevertheless stuffed that far down in the
> operating system. I have this on authority
> directly from one of the people who put it
> there, and was told to do so for "performance
> reasons" at the expense of bad quality.
>
How would you know, 'Kent'?
In your first paragraph you disavow
any action on your part to discover
what is going on in your Perpetual
Crashes.
You were never a software developer.
You definitely are NOT a software tester.
Kent 'Whiny Boi' Paul Dolan
couldn't code a stick in the mud
if it was sitting there in CVS already.
Rev. 11D Meow!
> play Freecell a lot. Since that seems to be a
> home computer about which you're bragging,
> that's you.
>
How would you know, 'Kent'?
You are too chicken-shit to
run windbg against your own crash dumps.
Yeah, you are the wizard of dumbosity.
Rev. 11D Meow!
> Punch cards, plug boards patch panel controls,
> typewriter output, wire hand threaded through
> core memory with each bit the diameter of a
> pencil eraser.
>
And 'Kent' hasn't learned one simple fact since then.
His ownership of the real problem.
DUMBOSITY!
A concept the rest of the world sees quite clearly
in every single bit he copy-pastes to the real people.
Kent Paul Dolan cannot even pass the Turing test.
boo yah!
Kent Paul Dolan
> "Kent Paul Dolan" <xanth...@well.com> wroted...
>> Rev. 11D Meow! wrote:
>>> ... I'll tell you which hardware driver on your
>>> system is causing your crashes.
>> That is information in which I have a profound
>> disinterest.
> Your gripes against Windows, Microsoft, and
> Software Test Engineers is henceforth moot.
Ever heard of "number agreement between subject
and verb", oh pretended quality control person?
Your dedication to the concept of "quality" can
only be judged in this forum by the quality of
what you post _here_, and so far, that quality
of what you post frankly reeks.
Well, no lackwit. Your stated desire for me to do
for you the work you were paid to do but failed to
do correctly or sufficiently, and me to do it for no
compensation, does not create in me a corresponding
obligation to do any such thing.
That's just you whining and begging for undeserved
charity like the puling, inadequate personal,
professional, and social failure that you are.
You spent _ten years_ in quality control, and have
no more friendly a relationship to "quality" than
this?
I spent _two months_ in quality control at Motorola,
and had the software developers begging our common
manager for mercy because of all the system-breaking
flaws I reported in their work.
xanthian.
Rev. 11D Meow!
Let's confab on your post-mortem, mmmmkay?
You keep lying like that and your nose will grow
long enough for use as the Space Elevator to Mars.
Let's see some of your Perfect Software, 'Kent'.
Until then, your whole argument is nulll and void.
Kent Paul Dolan
> Show us your Perfect Software, 'Kent'.
> I'll show you at least 20 bugs in it
> in less that half an hour.
That would be a bit of a surprise, since when I
asked the users if they'd abandoned using that
software because I never got any feedback about it
in three years from the initial delivery, the
response was that, in the case, they used it every
working day, it just never gave them any problems.
[The program created and maintained "a" data
base of depths and waypoints in dredged canals
for all US coastal waters (really, one such
data base per charting responsibility control
area, of which there were seven). It was
deliberately written to be as simple as possible
in concept, operation, and interface, just so
that it could be delivered bug free to users who
were shifting to computers from hand done work,
and who were for the most part highly
distrustful of computers, but were quite willing
to do labor intensive tasks to guarantee
quality. When a mere pen slip can cause a ship
to go aground, and lawsuits to fly, that
"quality first" mindset becomes pretty common.]
I'm more proud that it was my first (and only) paid
programming task written in COBOL, and I got it
right the first try, than that it was one of my many
bug free programs.
It really isn't all that hard to write bug free
software, so long as you keep it in the Unix "do one
small task well" model. You just end up having
written about six times as much quality control
code to test it before delivering it, as is code in
the delivered software.
[On the other hand, writing bug free "software
in the large" is a joke. I once, at eBay, found
and tediously eliminated what was essentially
the same bug written by others (failure to
understand how a C++ destructor _has_ to work
without throwing exceptions) over seven hundred
places in software that compiled to a two
gigabyte executable footprint.]
I _always_ do test driven development, even for
hobby stuff. I don't accept any programming jobs
from people who don't _expect_ that level of quality
control, and who instead focus on programming
deadlines to the exclusion of quality. Doing
quality _right_ is one of the little tricks you do
learn in 45 years of software development.
As for handing the code to you for your inspection,
well, no, that software was written in 1977 or so;
even if I still had the media, bit rot would have
done for it long ago.
It isn't like any of this "test thoroughly" stuff
isn't well known in the modern software development
community:
http://www.google.com/search?q=test.driven.development
I'm just glad to have been one of the probably many
people using test-driven-development since before it
was trendy.
It's just so incredibly obvious that the Microsoft
mindset doesn't include delivering software with no
failures in it.
For example, I once opened a box with a Microsoft
compiler inside (on floppies), and packed with it a
list of 125 _known_ bugs in _that very compiler_.
They were _happy_ to sell me their bugs, and happier
yet to sell me upgrades that supposedly took out
more bugs than they added (never the case). That
kind of arrogance fails even the "suitable for
merchandising" laws that prevail in most states of
the US.
xanthian.
Why do I bother to rewrite all this stuff? It sits in
the archives, from me, already.
rickthecockroach
Rev. 11D Meow! wrote:
> Let's see some of your Perfect Software, 'Kent'.
> Until then, your whole argument is nulll and void.
10 Print 'Hello world!'
20 Run 10
kirkus vomit
>
> Rev. 11D Meow! wrote:
>> Let's see some of your Perfect Software, 'Kent'.
>> Until then, your whole argument is nulll and void.
kirkus vomit
import java.awt.*
import javax.swing.*
class HelloKunt extends JFrame{
String message = "Hello World";
Jlabel msg = new JLabel(message);
add(msg, JLabel.CENTER);
setSize(500, 500);
setVisible(true);
}
public static void main (Striong[] args){
HelloKunt;
}
}
Rev. 11D Meow!
"rickthecockroach" <manical...@hotmail.com> wroted...
Run it on a machine with zero free memory and it will fail.
Never forget stress testing.