Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th May 2014 21:24 UTC
In the News

It's hard to explain to regular people how much technology barely works, how much the infrastructure of our lives is held together by the IT equivalent of baling wire.

Computers, and computing, are broken.

Software sucks. It really, really sucks. I have yet to meet a piece of software that didn't make me go "...eh." several times per hour - whether it be a videogame, a browser, or an operating system.

Thread beginning with comment 589726
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
TM99
Member since:
2012-08-26

I don't think anyone is arguing against QA steps. In fact, I would agree that those need beefing up as well as the professionalism of the earlier stages of development.

I am quite aware of the concepts you are putting forth despite my professional background. Trust me, there really aren't as many differences as you imagine.

Planning, conducting and publishing research for review is not that different. It follows similar QA and specific cross-profession standards.

It isn't just mission critical needs, it is reliability. If that wash machine in your example has poor QA and buggy software, it will be recalled or manufacture fixed. If it isn't, then there are liability issues that arise. If those aren't addressed, the company in question runs the risk of lawsuits and even going out of business. The same kind of standards and professionalism just don't exist currently in OS, application, and game design.

Hello I am Warner Bros, and I could give a shit about fixing the bugs in Batman, all I care about is taking your money from DLC purchases. That's the kind of bullshit that needs to stop, and is not allowed in other regulated professions.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/02/10/warner-prioritizing-dlc-...

And here is another example:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-07-19-fez-developer-wont...

I think many more examples including Heartbleed and others could be found. There is a problem. There are solutions. Many software developers unfortunately do live in a fantasy world of specialness and freedom at all costs.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

TM99,

It isn't just mission critical needs, it is reliability. If that wash machine in your example has poor QA and buggy software, it will be recalled or manufacture fixed. If it isn't, then there are liability issues that arise. If those aren't addressed, the company in question runs the risk of lawsuits and even going out of business. The same kind of standards and professionalism just don't exist currently in OS, application, and game design.

Hello I am Warner Bros, and I could give a shit about fixing the bugs in Batman, all I care about is taking your money from DLC purchases. That's the kind of bullshit that needs to stop, and is not allowed in other regulated professions.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/02/10/warner-prioritizing-dlc-...

And here is another example:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-07-19-fez-developer-wont...


I agree that these are bad outcomes. Yet aren't you forced to concede that it's the company's decision not to fix the bugs for financial/resource reasons? It's not like the software developers themselves are unwilling/unable to fix them. The question of funding keeps on getting overlooked.


I think many more examples including Heartbleed and others could be found. There is a problem. There are solutions.


Heartbleed was serious, and there are plenty more examples of exploitable vulnerabilities in both proprietary and open source domains. Yet you realize that OpenSSL was/is free software? You did not pay it's developers for it, right? I'm willing to bet that you didn't have any kind of support contract from any of it's developers, right? Did you donate anything to help fund QA, code reviews, or even developer training/certification? If not then it seems completely hypocritical to tell software developers how to do our work, and then not come through with ways to fund these things (even commercial projects can face internal resource problems as highlighted by your links).


Many software developers unfortunately do live in a fantasy world of specialness and freedom at all costs.


With all due respect, maybe the fantasy is that having state license requirements would somehow give software developers the resources we need to improve software from it's present state. This is the actual problem that we could use a solution for!

Edited 2014-05-28 18:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2