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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1db77fbb2768946e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1143c4,7d107e452bdd8496 X-Google-Attributes: gid1143c4,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,7d107e452bdd8496 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-03 16:48:49 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!129.240.148.23!uio.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: linux.dev.kernel,comp.realtime,comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is Linux right for Embedded? Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 23:48:47 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: <3BB69F21.B5AA7451@intercom.com> <9pcvbn$r52$1@xmission.xmission.com> <9pd4s402bga@drn.newsguy.com> <9pfcps$p0l$1@xmission.xmission.com> <9pfeiu$cfr$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9pfj8a$ebc$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9pfuqg$ikl$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1002152927 350 129.241.83.82 (3 Oct 2001 23:48:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 23:48:47 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.2 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com linux.dev.kernel:4517 comp.realtime:3960 comp.lang.ada:13697 Date: 2001-10-03T23:48:47+00:00 List-Id: On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 17:09:35 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote: > Fair enough - but keep in mind this fundamental principle of engineering: > "Not All Things Worth Doing Are Worth Doing Well." Unfortunately a large part of the software industry has taken it as "Release It Yesterday, Consumers Are Used To Bugs" I would say. > Or phrased another way: "'Good Enough' Is Not Nearly So Wonderful A Thing As > 'Perfect', But Its Good Enough!" > > Everything you say is true, but when talking to people who develop > throw-away code, the emphasis should be on time-to-market and reliability > rather than long-term benefits such as reduced maintenance or reusable code. I cannot see that Ada wouldn't accommodate on all these areas. :-) > Otherwise, folks in a fast-moving throw-away market may find the argument > interesting, but not compelling. My hope is that the folks in the fast-moving throw-away market are throwing themselves out with the bath water :-) I mean "Good Enough" isn't "Good Enough" for the comsumer when he suddenly finds himself with a negative bank account on Monday morning due to an software error in a banks software which is fixed soonest next day more likely next week. Or I don't expect the Software Industry to clean up its act themselves. I'm hoping the consumers take action and start realizing that it _may_ be cheaper in the long run to pay for good quality and avoid all costy troubles in the future that cheap JIT code gives. It is funny as I just see now that Microsoft is saying that they will "Step Up Software Security" (http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-10-03-019-20-SC-MS). I guess the only reason for this statement is recent suggestions from Gartner Group (and others) that consumers should replace Windows with other OSes due to poor security. Preben Randhol