4 ms·

> open-source is actually a protection against that, not a liability Theoretically, but in practice open source software is decidedly worse at this sort of thi

> open-source is actually a protection against that, not a liability Theoretically, but in practice open source software is decidedly worse at this sort of thing than OS X or Windows. I suspect that the profit motive is a driving factor here. You can tell that this maintainer does not care or lacks the capacity to empathize at all about his users. Maybe because they are not the ones paying the bills?

gcr 17y ago
Hmm? Could you care to explain your reasoning? Are you speaking of bug counts per lines of code? Or something else? In my eyes, I'm glad that this bug report is in the wild. I'm glad microsoft employees are waving this around in our faces because look how many lives this bug report will save. Look how many people won't get bit by this bug now that they know about it. On the other hand, I can't explain how many times I've used Microsoft's installers, following the instructions to the T only to wind up with broken software or even yes, trashed filesystems. Perhaps you're right. Maybe open source software is more buggy than our middle-management-driven alternatives. But at least we aren't afraid to warn people of its faults. I think the fact that we don't need to cover critical bugs like this up to keep profits high says something positive about this model of development.
- houseabsolute 17y ago
  > Are you speaking of bug counts per lines of code? Or something else? I speak of incidents I've read about and incidents experienced myself. These are not statistics, but they satisfy me. > I'm glad microsoft employees are waving this around in our faces Where? Or is this the standard OSS "everyone who criticizes Linux is a secret Microsoft employee" line of thinking? > Look how many people won't get bit by this bug now that they know about it Falsely assuming that a significant number of those with the potential to be affected actually know about it . . . > following the instructions to the T only to wind up with broken software or even yes, trashed filesystems. Somehow most other people manage to do it without many problems. > But at least we aren't afraid to warn people of its faults . . . I believe Microsoft and Apple's KB systems are more complete and well organized than Ubuntu's bug-tracker. > critical bugs like this You may not need to cover them, but you're also the only ones who actually have them in significant number. I prefer an organization that cares enough to prevent the bugs from happening but does not disclose them to one where the bugs are disclosed then ignored with insults.
  - gcr 17y ago
    Oh, I see where you're coming from. Sorry, I didn't mean no flamin'. Let me clarify my points real quick, then I'll go back to my n00bishness with my 5 precious karma and my fiery tongue. >> I'm glad microsoft employees are waving this around in our faces >Where? Or is this the standard OSS "everyone who criticizes Linux is a secret Microsoft employee" line of thinking? Oops, I forgot to mention my source. That was from the bug report itself, comment 18 -- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/upstart/+bug/557177/comments/18 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/upstart/+bug/55717... -- in which someone was alerted to the bug because a Microsoft employee poked some fun about it. > > Look how many people won't get bit by this bug now that they know about it > Falsely assuming that a significant number of those with the potential to be affected actually know about it . . . I think most competent system administrators who would invoke such a script (it was not an automatic action, this bug is triggered by explicitly running a script that was introduced in the latest unreleased ubuntu version) probably read either reddit or digg or hackernews and would likely know about this very popular bug by now. Which is an advantage because now they won't be bitten by it. > Somehow most other people manage to do it without many problems. Guess I'm not one of them. > I believe Microsoft and Apple's KB systems are more complete and well organized than Ubuntu's bug-tracker. Perhaps you're right. You have more experience with them. I haven't even seen their bug trackers, and likely wouldn't have access to them unless I were a Microsoft or Apple employee. That's how most proprietary companies' bug trackers work. > You may not need to cover them, but you're also the only ones who actually have them in significant number. Funny, I thought all software was buggy? At least, the stuff I write sure is. > I prefer an organization that cares enough to prevent the bugs from happening but does not disclose them to one where the bugs are disclosed then ignored with insults. Fair enough. But to be honest, this is not an organization we're dealing with here. This is not a system we're criticizing here. This is the problem of one maintainer's silly response to a simple problem. No reason to blame the entire system for one maintainer's bad day. No software is bug free. But I personally would rather either submit a patch (you can do that with open-source software) or poke a maintainer (a living breathing doorway into the code and the development process) than navigate through Apple corporation's or Microsoft corporation's complete and well-organized knowledge bases or bug tracking systems only to find out this programmer might not feel like fixing that bug and there's nothing more I could do. Oh wait, I guess I contradicted myself there. Bah, you know what I meant; I'm still new to this 'arguing with people over the Internet' thing and you hacker newsies are quite an incredibly perceptive bunch.
sophacles 17y ago
Not so much. Im dealing with a vendor right now -- we have paid support, and have spent thousands with them. As a developer, I have sent several fairly deep/detailed questions about their api and code. The response has been alternating evasions and attacks on my "style" for not using the api the way they intended. If this is what profit motive gets me, I'll stick with "for the love of it" motive any day. There are jerks everywhere, at least with OSS I'm not paying for the privelege. (The fact I'm using the vendor's stuff wrong is entirely possible, but the training supposedly included in our support package keeps getting delayed so I can't be certain how to properly use it).
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Just like with open source, you have some great companies in the closed source world and not so great ones (and outright lousy ones). The 'after sales support' factor in closed source is a huge one and it is a good indicator of long term success of a company.
masomenos 17y ago
If you follow the MACENTERPRISE mailing list, you might come to a different conclusion about Apple's responsiveness to bugs. Or, how about response to the vulnerabilities exploited in pwn2own? Firefox got fixed in about a week, but Safari is still unpatched.

gcr 17y ago

Hmm? Could you care to explain your reasoning? Are you speaking of bug counts per lines of code? Or something else? In my eyes, I'm glad that this bug report is in the wild. I'm glad microsoft employees are waving this around in our faces because look how many lives this bug report will save. Look how many people won't get bit by this bug now that they know about it. On the other hand, I can't explain how many times I've used Microsoft's installers, following the instructions to the T only to wind up with broken software or even yes, trashed filesystems. Perhaps you're right. Maybe open source software is more buggy than our middle-management-driven alternatives. But at least we aren't afraid to warn people of its faults. I think the fact that we don't need to cover critical bugs like this up to keep profits high says something positive about this model of development.

houseabsolute 17y ago
> Are you speaking of bug counts per lines of code? Or something else? I speak of incidents I've read about and incidents experienced myself. These are not statistics, but they satisfy me. > I'm glad microsoft employees are waving this around in our faces Where? Or is this the standard OSS "everyone who criticizes Linux is a secret Microsoft employee" line of thinking? > Look how many people won't get bit by this bug now that they know about it Falsely assuming that a significant number of those with the potential to be affected actually know about it . . . > following the instructions to the T only to wind up with broken software or even yes, trashed filesystems. Somehow most other people manage to do it without many problems. > But at least we aren't afraid to warn people of its faults . . . I believe Microsoft and Apple's KB systems are more complete and well organized than Ubuntu's bug-tracker. > critical bugs like this You may not need to cover them, but you're also the only ones who actually have them in significant number. I prefer an organization that cares enough to prevent the bugs from happening but does not disclose them to one where the bugs are disclosed then ignored with insults.
- gcr 17y ago
  Oh, I see where you're coming from. Sorry, I didn't mean no flamin'. Let me clarify my points real quick, then I'll go back to my n00bishness with my 5 precious karma and my fiery tongue. >> I'm glad microsoft employees are waving this around in our faces >Where? Or is this the standard OSS "everyone who criticizes Linux is a secret Microsoft employee" line of thinking? Oops, I forgot to mention my source. That was from the bug report itself, comment 18 -- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/upstart/+bug/557177/comments/18 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/upstart/+bug/55717... -- in which someone was alerted to the bug because a Microsoft employee poked some fun about it. > > Look how many people won't get bit by this bug now that they know about it > Falsely assuming that a significant number of those with the potential to be affected actually know about it . . . I think most competent system administrators who would invoke such a script (it was not an automatic action, this bug is triggered by explicitly running a script that was introduced in the latest unreleased ubuntu version) probably read either reddit or digg or hackernews and would likely know about this very popular bug by now. Which is an advantage because now they won't be bitten by it. > Somehow most other people manage to do it without many problems. Guess I'm not one of them. > I believe Microsoft and Apple's KB systems are more complete and well organized than Ubuntu's bug-tracker. Perhaps you're right. You have more experience with them. I haven't even seen their bug trackers, and likely wouldn't have access to them unless I were a Microsoft or Apple employee. That's how most proprietary companies' bug trackers work. > You may not need to cover them, but you're also the only ones who actually have them in significant number. Funny, I thought all software was buggy? At least, the stuff I write sure is. > I prefer an organization that cares enough to prevent the bugs from happening but does not disclose them to one where the bugs are disclosed then ignored with insults. Fair enough. But to be honest, this is not an organization we're dealing with here. This is not a system we're criticizing here. This is the problem of one maintainer's silly response to a simple problem. No reason to blame the entire system for one maintainer's bad day. No software is bug free. But I personally would rather either submit a patch (you can do that with open-source software) or poke a maintainer (a living breathing doorway into the code and the development process) than navigate through Apple corporation's or Microsoft corporation's complete and well-organized knowledge bases or bug tracking systems only to find out this programmer might not feel like fixing that bug and there's nothing more I could do. Oh wait, I guess I contradicted myself there. Bah, you know what I meant; I'm still new to this 'arguing with people over the Internet' thing and you hacker newsies are quite an incredibly perceptive bunch.

sophacles 17y ago

Not so much. Im dealing with a vendor right now -- we have paid support, and have spent thousands with them. As a developer, I have sent several fairly deep/detailed questions about their api and code. The response has been alternating evasions and attacks on my "style" for not using the api the way they intended. If this is what profit motive gets me, I'll stick with "for the love of it" motive any day. There are jerks everywhere, at least with OSS I'm not paying for the privelege. (The fact I'm using the vendor's stuff wrong is entirely possible, but the training supposedly included in our support package keeps getting delayed so I can't be certain how to properly use it).

jacquesm 17y ago
Just like with open source, you have some great companies in the closed source world and not so great ones (and outright lousy ones). The 'after sales support' factor in closed source is a huge one and it is a good indicator of long term success of a company.

masomenos 17y ago

If you follow the MACENTERPRISE mailing list, you might come to a different conclusion about Apple's responsiveness to bugs. Or, how about response to the vulnerabilities exploited in pwn2own? Firefox got fixed in about a week, but Safari is still unpatched.