From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,11414a19b0e4a97a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!news2.arglkargh.de!news.tornevall.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Advice on selling Ada to a C shop
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 10:38:51 -0700
Organization: TornevallNET - http://news.tornevall.net
Message-ID: <hvo844$h10$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
References: <87631dmdmz.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <2bb211f057648e4d892829e5ee79e34c@mixmaster.it>
 <Xns9D9E6CAC4EEWarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.230>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ab0ce1e7c5d1e94422eb95538a2905dd
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: 77cd84cb57ff63e68a266c719a5fd743
X-Complaints-To: abuse@tornevall.net
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100411)
X-Complaints-Language: Spoken language is english or swedish - NOT ITALIAN,
 FRENCH, GERMAN OR ANY OTHER LANGUAGE!
In-Reply-To: <Xns9D9E6CAC4EEWarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.230>
X-Validate-Post: 
 http://news.tornevall.net/validate.php?trace=77cd84cb57ff63e68a266c719a5fd743
X-SpeedUI: 1738
X-Complaints-Italiano: Non abbiamo padronanza della lingua italiana - se
 mandate una email scrivete solo in Inglese, grazie
X-Posting-User: 0243687135df8c4b260dd4a9a93c79bd
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11858
Date: 2010-06-21T10:38:51-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Warren wrote:
> 
> I think you are generally right, until you get to "Quality
> no longer matters". I think it usually _does_ matter, but as
> you say, they've come to accept bugs as "normal".  A quality
> product is still the goal from semi-honest companies. Certainly
> from a competitive pov.

Not necessarily. US defense "cost-plus" contracts are more profitable the lower 
the quality (as long as the quality remains acceptable to the customer, who has 
been brainwashed to accept fairly low quality).

Then there's commercial SW. Once you have the perfect word processor, you won't 
be able to sell upgrades, so a buggy product is more profitable. In fact, 
current word processors may be approaching this (for the most common uses), 
leading major word-processor vendors to transition to a SW-as-a-service model to 
maintain a revenue stream.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"We use a large, vibrating egg."
Annie Hall
44