Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com
> anyone who has worked professionally in the software
> development business will agree that any large software organization has
> a large backlog of bugs, and will also agree that the number of bugs on
> the backlog is relatively unimportant compared to how well truly
> critical bugs are triaged.
Hi Jolly Roger,
I'm going to treat you, in this response, as if you're an adult (just like I
treat Steve, badgolferman, JF Mezei, and Ant as adults).
Adults can comprehend the facts.
Adults can integrate nuance of facts into their belief systems.
Therefore, as someone who successfully worked in Silicon Valley startups for
decades, I will assume, for a moment, that your brain is that of an adult.
In the companies I worked for, when a bug was found, not only was that bug
fixed, but we always implemented procedures to check for that same bug in
_every_ subsequent release of code. It's what good companies do.
This bug, as you must be aware of by now, is a _repeat_ of a previous bug,
and this isn't even the first time Apple has let an existing bug repeat.
The fact is that Google proved beyond a doubt that entire huge sections of
Apple code have had _zero QA_ in years, Jolly Roger.
What you apologists are ignorant of is Apple doesn't test their code base.
Apple lets the user do the testing and the fact remains that Apple _never_
finds these zero-click zero-day holes - they're always found by others.
In a word, Apple doesn't give a shit about their code quality.
It's sufficient (for their customer base) to just paint walls with slogans.
Of all high tech companies, Apple is all marketing and almost zero R&D.