The
Attitude steams directly from the top.
981 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Oct 2009
Preemptive execution and huge caches strikes again. Given some situations, you can have a lot of rolling back and invalidating of cache lines to do on a context switch which has caused all sorts of design decisions to be made including the one to move away from micro kernels which, I feel, is a poor one. When I was doing such things, I measured Ultra SPARC CPUs using an average of 4 clock cycles to perform a context switch in and out of kernel space. That figure on modern CPUs and kernels is in the order of hundreds and even thousands of clock cycles, and no, they are not clocked that much faster. The quest for straight line CPU speed and marketing bragging rights amongst CPU manufactures has had many consequences in both the security of and the real world speed of systems.
Think a more interesting question is; why are there so many patches? A combination of poor release and testing systems combined with a high threat area and intensity are probably two of the main factors. Perhaps those areas could be improved upon which would lead to a much happier life for both the poor sods applying the patches and the end users experience of the system.
StewartWhite: just read your post. I agree, we should not just tolerate the current mess.
Software is a goods (that sounds awful). There are services around the goods such as maintenance, installation etc. but the delivered software is most definitely a goods. It does have a physical instantiation, it does have set of delivered features, it must deliver on those expectations. The instantiation is the material that it is delivered upon. In ancient times that might be a tape or a disc but nowadays it's more likely to be a download, which is instantiated on the receiving device. The set of features is the definition of what the software is expected to do. The expectation is that it delivers those features correctly and without prejudice.
The rules that apply to goods apply to software, it's just that most don't seem to know or care. Mostly the problems around fitness for purpose stem from a lack of clear definitions or changing expectations. We have been bludgeoned over the years into accepting very poor quality software. Free software has also muddied the waters and lowered expectations. To use your example of cars. There are well defined systems for recalling cars to fix defects that have caused the delivered goods (the car) from not performing to either the expected specification or to regulation. This includes the software components of the car as well as the more physical components. Such pathways should also be available for software only goods.
We just live with poor software and throw our collective hands up as if saying. "it's all far too complicated" and "what do you expect". Well, how about expecting well engineered software that correctly deals with the complexity. Oh, you would probably have to pay for it but who expects a free car?
/EndRant
Not just for chasing media formats. One of the background tasks that computer operators (remember them :) ) did when things where quiet was Forth Bridging tapes. That is, copying and old archive tapes onto other tapes so that the archive remained viable. If I remember correctly, the operating system (George 3 at the time) had a built in job to keep track of everything and prompt which tapes needed to go on which drives etc. Just leaving a tape to molder in an archive is a sure way to have a write only backup.
The ICL Technical Journal, 1987:
"The present 5G programme has been designed to respond to a number of pressures, some recent and some visible within the industry for many years. The main drivers have been:
The high cost and unpredictability of software development and maintenance, coupled with the shortage and mobility of trained programming staff. This has been a constant problem within the industry for two decades in spite of significant advances in software engineering methodology and more recently with the widespread adoption of fourth generation systems. It used to be called the “software crisis”, but the word “crisis” seems inappropriate for a phenomenon of such longevity. “Limit to growth” is a more durable phrase which better captures the effect of this problem."
This was the justification for a number of workbench (old name for IDEs) style 5G products within ICL to improve programmer productivity most of which tried to autocomplete and suggest boilerplate style code. It would seem nothing much has changed...
Is just like any other goods or service and should be treated as such. If they do not work as described, then they are not fit for purpose. The consumer Rights Act 2015 and the amended Sale Of Goods Act 1979 are quiet clear on that. Well, in the UK at least. Other jurisdictions may vary.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/notes/division/3/1/4
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/faulty-goods-digital-content-services/
I think that if a council area is run into bankruptcy (section 114 notice), then all the responsible elected officers should be bared from office and the whole council should be put up for re-election. Letting the same bunch of councilors that caused the issue (or at least didn't deal with previous issues) try to fix them seems ludicrous.