Linked by Kroc Camen on Mon 20th Jul 2009 17:18 UTC
Podcasts We are joined on the show this week by our guest Tess Flynn, a consultant and technology trainer in the US midwest. She helps us discuss the past present and future of operating systems including the Amiga, BeOS and RISC OS camps and what monstrosity (or majesty) would arise if we combined their powers.
Permalink for comment 375189
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
A few Thoughts
by Wes Selken on Sat 25th Jul 2009 06:44 UTC
Wes Selken
Member since:
2009-07-25

A couple things I'd like to bring up.

First, you guys made a comment that in the propriety world the client comes up with a design and the programmer has to follow it exactly. That's not really true. In the propriety world coders often have input on how the design of the system will work (and should). Yes, there is comprise to please to the client, but it's much more of a collaboration of the design, where the programmers try lead the design in a way favourable to the programmers and their goals(i.e maintainability, reusability, etc). Also, its unfair to say open source doesn't take in account the client(or perhaps user in this case) when designing. Since often in open source the user doesn't pay (although for the linux kernel this makes up only about 30% of developers, src: http://www.linuxfoundation.org/publications/linuxkerneldevelopment....) then its hard for them to contribute to the project, since the programmers can just say no to client without worrying about losing funds. But the open source community has found ways for the users to contribute(like ubuntu has come up with brainstorm). When it comes down to it, you always going to need to come up a way to satisfy users the most and with the best possible program design. The programmers and clients goals don't always conflict, and part of being a software engineer is finding a way to meet both. But you can't always satisfy both. and generally propriety leans towards the client and open source towards the client(probably but I can't prove that).

I laughed at your comment that in the future we will have many more computers, with each doing a distinct task, rather than one computer that tries to do it all. Imagine a gaming console that only plays game, a dvd player that only plays dvd. Maybe even a cell phone just used to make calls (perhaps too futuristic?). But seriously, their advantages to having multiple with that have distinct task, they usually perform that task better, but have a one computer do everything is cheaper and easier to manage. We kind of gone always from multiple computers towards one computer that does everything. But its possible that we'll start going away from that, but who knows. I certainly don't.

Any thoughts? I certainly appreciate comments/feedback.

Reply Score: 1