Faulty hardware found on shuttle

Scott Hedrick wrote:

"JazzMan" wrote in message
...
Thus, the free market in action. Nobody is forced to buy MS products.
They

Sigh... Nevermind.

The way you folded when confronted with the facts is telling.

Sure, you can see it that way if you want. Me? I just see
it as arguing with a stone, it accomplishes nothing.

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

And Thank GOD for that. The mere thought of Microsoft-generated code
running something as expensive as the Shuttle gives me cold shivers.

Hate to break it to ya, but MS code does run on the shuttles. Granted, it's
on the crew's laptop PCs and not the main flight computers, and it's not
trusted for anything critical, but it's there.

Jorge,

You might re-read his post. He was referring to code that "runs the shuttle",
not code that just happens to be going along for the ride.

--
Dave Michelson

On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 19:54:31 -0500, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:

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. Thus, it's
very clear that MS operating systems are the best on the market, because the
market buys them more than the alternatives.

....Also, keep in mind that the market tends to eschew purchasing that
which might be considered incompatible with what the majority of the
market uses. This is why proprietary parts tend to cause lower return
sales in the long run, and why most sane people avoid Macs like AIDS.
It's also why IBM's Micro Channel Architecture failed miserably(*),
and why Dell abandoned their attempts in the early 90's to force hard
drive vendors to swap around certain pins on the then-new IDE
connectors they were being shipped so that cheaper 3rd-party drives
couldn't be bought to replace/upgrade drives sold with their systems.

(*) Complete and total lack of the promised performance increase,
hardware stability, and ease of configuration should not be ignored as
contributing factors, natch.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

"Marvin" wrote ...
Windows is a very fancy system, its got more bells & whistles than anyone
can discover in a lifetime.

But what users actually need (despite contrary propaganda from microsoft),
is a *stable* and *predictable* and *secure* system.

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.
Not to mention that they want any applications they are interested in to be
released for their OS.

"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.

"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.

"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
This is why proprietary parts tend to cause lower return
sales in the long run, and why most sane people avoid Macs like AIDS.

I had a Radio Shack computer in 1990. I wanted to add a second floppy drive
to it. The Radio Shack dealer gave me some serious attitude, and he could
get away with it because Radio Shack used special connectors. A simple
serial card, about $15 for most computers, ran $60, and a 20meg HD plus
adapters would have cost me over $600. They wanted $109 for a 3.5" drive and
they wouldn't start looking until I produced the cash first.

Needless to say, for $300 I upgraded to a 486 (from an 8086) with a HD and 4
times the RAM, and I didn't buy from Radio Shack

"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.