Faulty hardware found on shuttle

"Dave Michelson" wrote in message
news:%XK9c.37119$R27.31744@pd7tw2no...
Why is it unrealistic for Microsoft, with far
greater financial resources at its disposal, to achieve the same degree of
success in a similar environment?

Perhaps it's because any such OS won't be backwards-compatible.

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message
...

"JazzMan" wrote in message
...
Uhh, ask anyone why they are running MS OS on their system
and they'll tell you that it's because that's what came on
it, not because they actively sought it out.

Thus, the free market in action. Nobody is forced to buy MS products. They
buy MS products because they either sought out an MS product or they
didn't
care when they bought a product that happened to include something from
MS.
In short, it was an intentional action on the part of the buyer.

A lot of people *are* forced to use Windows because it is the only OS that
has apps (also by MS) that can access their data files. A further lot of
people are forced to use Windows because their boss bought it for them.

I would use either provided they appear reasonablyu safe. that is have very few
failures and tend not to do them often in a newsworthy way/
Hey this is my opinion

"rk" wrote in message
...
Mary Shafer wrote:

On 29 Mar 2004 03:16:58 GMT, rk
wrote:

So, would you go with complex software-based fly-by-wire system with
extremely elaborate sets of computers that have very complex design
considerations?

Or fly-by-steel and fly-by-oil which is simpler and has less possible
failure modes?

Yes, I would. Yes, I have. The F-4E for the latter and the NF-16D
for the former. Yes, I'd do it again.

OK.

Now, drive-by-wire (braking and steering) for your family car?


Sure. And if GM ends up building cars based on its skateboard design,
you'll see it sooner rather than later.



--
rk, Just an OldEngineer
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public
relations, for nature cannot be fooled."
-- R. Feynman, Appendix F.

"JazzMan" wrote in message
...
Me? I just see
it as arguing with a stone, it accomplishes nothing.

Yes, I *could have* argued with you, but the public was better served by my
putting the facts out there.

"Neil Gerace" wrote in message
. au...
A lot of people *are* forced to use Windows because it is the only OS that
has apps (also by MS) that can access their data files.

So MicroSoft puts a gun to their head? Horse****. They *choose* to buy and
use MS because it's easier than using one of the alternatives.

A further lot of
people are forced to use Windows because their boss bought it for them.

More horse****. If you don't want to use Windows, change jobs. If you don't
change jobs, it's because *you choose* to continue to use MS products. If
the use of MS products offends you, you're free to stop, but that *choice*
will have consequences.

"Neil Gerace" wrote in message
. au...
I've had XP Pro on my new machine, it hasn't crashed once. Certainly some
apps have, most notably Outlook Express 6, but not WinXP itself.

OE6 is probably the most crash-prone product I use.

I've been thinking about changing over, but I'm going to wait until I buy a
brand new machine. My existing hardware might run it, but not much else.

"Paul Blay" wrote in message
...
That may be what users /need/ but what they /want/ is a stable,
predictable and
secure system with those *particular* bells and whistles that take their
fancy.

Along with a low learning curve, and for which they can get loads of help
from friends who know about it.

"Neil Gerace" wrote in message
. au...

"Dave Michelson" wrote in message
news:%XK9c.37119$R27.31744@pd7tw2no...
Why is it unrealistic for Microsoft, with far
greater financial resources at its disposal, to achieve the same degree
of
success in a similar environment?

Perhaps it's because any such OS won't be backwards-compatible.

*That* is the real reason. After decades of experience, building a solid OS
should be trivial. However, it would be impossible to do so and also run all
of the previous apps. I didn't know that some of my favorite software needed
certain DOS modes until I installed the Windows ME virus, which gave up some
compatibility for stability.

Neil Gerace wrote:

A further lot of people are forced to use Windows because their boss bought
it for them.

Heh. IEEE 802 meetings are a great place to take the pulse of the laptop
community. Several hundred people converge on the conference venue with
laptops in hand; it's amazing to walk into the plenary session and see laptops
*everywhere*. (And the hundreds of metres of heavy duty extension cords that
are taped to the floor and which provide power to the outlet strips
conveniently placed under every table...)

I was amazed at the number of times people would come up to me and express
surprise that I was running Linux....

[Them] Excuse me, but is that Linux that you're running on your laptop?

[Me] Yes, it is.

[Them] I'm envious. Our IT guys won't even let us install our own
application software on ours, let alone Linux. How did you
convince your IT guys to let you put Linux on yours?

Their expectation that I might have a magic answer for them is dashed when I
reply that IT guys in university academic departments have to be a little more
accommodating than those in industry.

--
Dave Michelson