5 ms·

I would argue that the majority of developers are juggling half a dozen tasks that need to be done ASAP and a simple quadratic solution was fast enough for the

I would argue that the majority of developers are juggling half a dozen tasks that need to be done ASAP and a simple quadratic solution was fast enough for the use case they had in mind and there definitely was no time to optimize for the case of invisible icons.

baobabKoodaa 6y ago
From the perspective of an individual developer that may be the case, but it's inexcusable for Microsoft as an organization.
- hhjj 6y ago
  There are still a lot of bugs, features not working at all in windows. So a feature that works but slowly in extraordinary (for most users) conditions is not prioritized. If you want a bug-free os, you'll pay an extreme price in features or in dollars.
  - baobabKoodaa 6y ago
    > There are still a lot of bugs, features not working at all in windows. So a feature that works but slowly in extraordinary (for most users) conditions is not prioritized. Please don't pretend like Microsoft has rationally prioritized the feature/bug work on Windows. Microsoft is spending resources pushing ridiculously niche use cases like "3D Objects". Microsoft is also doing a bunch of duplicate work, for example, maintaining 2 different UIs for Control Panel even though the old one was fine. Maybe it's time for Microsoft to stop the endless re-designs just for the sake of "new is better", and maybe focus on fixing bugs?
    - tom_ 6y ago
      You may be correct in the larger sense, but there will be multiple teams working on Windows, with non-interchangeable staff. Assuming anybody found this bug before, somebody on the Explorer team almost certainly will have rationally prioritized it.
      - lupire 6y ago
        Why? Would someone rationally get a bonus for fixing this instead of whatever quarterly promise they made to their boss? What's rational about fixing a bug that isn't threatening revenue?
        tom_ 6y ago
        They wouldn't. The person rationally prioritizing this bug will have put it somewhere down the bottom of the list. And that's how we find ourselves here, with the issue unfixed.
  - kasabali 6y ago
    > If you want a bug-free os, you'll pay an extreme price in features or in dollars. It isn't like Windows division doesn't make billions of dollars every year. Lack of resources is hardly an excuse.
  - BillinghamJ 6y ago
    I suspect in both features & dollars!
scatters 6y ago
This affects visible icons as well; the icons being invisible in the original report is just the icing on the cake.
- alisonkisk 6y ago
  I would argue that the majority of developers are juggling half a dozen tasks that need to be done ASAP , so they skim a bug report and mark it as irrelevant to the use case they had in mind, and there definitely was no time to read the bug report carefully and understand the core issue it was describing.
centimeter 6y ago
This attitude is why 98% of software is absolute dogshit. Have some pride.
seph-reed 6y ago
I've never really understood this mentality. It's probably a privilege thing, but I always argue for doing things the right way. I got fired for it once, but I live below my means just in case that happens anyways. I don't need much, and don't take on debt. IMO, the kind of devs who do this shit are like union scabs: they make things worse for everyone else because they don't have the ability to stand up for themselves.
- bayindirh 6y ago
  I can think of two reasons why this happened in the first place. - Either it was good enough in low resolution screens, and algorithm just considered mature and nobody think about it after that. - Or, it was implemented with "first commit which meets requirements wins" competition, and it just didn't get the attention it needed. I'm like you, a big fan of "do it once, do it right", but not everyone understands how well-polishing something presumably small affects everything like a butterfly effect. Some people just want to tick all the boxes and go home. There's no inherent wrong with this, but when combined with wrong constraints and incentives, these things happen.

baobabKoodaa 6y ago

From the perspective of an individual developer that may be the case, but it's inexcusable for Microsoft as an organization.

hhjj 6y ago
There are still a lot of bugs, features not working at all in windows. So a feature that works but slowly in extraordinary (for most users) conditions is not prioritized. If you want a bug-free os, you'll pay an extreme price in features or in dollars.
- baobabKoodaa 6y ago
  > There are still a lot of bugs, features not working at all in windows. So a feature that works but slowly in extraordinary (for most users) conditions is not prioritized. Please don't pretend like Microsoft has rationally prioritized the feature/bug work on Windows. Microsoft is spending resources pushing ridiculously niche use cases like "3D Objects". Microsoft is also doing a bunch of duplicate work, for example, maintaining 2 different UIs for Control Panel even though the old one was fine. Maybe it's time for Microsoft to stop the endless re-designs just for the sake of "new is better", and maybe focus on fixing bugs?
  - tom_ 6y ago
    You may be correct in the larger sense, but there will be multiple teams working on Windows, with non-interchangeable staff. Assuming anybody found this bug before, somebody on the Explorer team almost certainly will have rationally prioritized it.
    - lupire 6y ago
      Why? Would someone rationally get a bonus for fixing this instead of whatever quarterly promise they made to their boss? What's rational about fixing a bug that isn't threatening revenue?
      - tom_ 6y ago
        They wouldn't. The person rationally prioritizing this bug will have put it somewhere down the bottom of the list. And that's how we find ourselves here, with the issue unfixed.
- kasabali 6y ago
  > If you want a bug-free os, you'll pay an extreme price in features or in dollars. It isn't like Windows division doesn't make billions of dollars every year. Lack of resources is hardly an excuse.
- BillinghamJ 6y ago
  I suspect in both features & dollars!

scatters 6y ago

This affects visible icons as well; the icons being invisible in the original report is just the icing on the cake.

alisonkisk 6y ago
I would argue that the majority of developers are juggling half a dozen tasks that need to be done ASAP , so they skim a bug report and mark it as irrelevant to the use case they had in mind, and there definitely was no time to read the bug report carefully and understand the core issue it was describing.

centimeter 6y ago

This attitude is why 98% of software is absolute dogshit. Have some pride.

seph-reed 6y ago

I've never really understood this mentality. It's probably a privilege thing, but I always argue for doing things the right way. I got fired for it once, but I live below my means just in case that happens anyways. I don't need much, and don't take on debt. IMO, the kind of devs who do this shit are like union scabs: they make things worse for everyone else because they don't have the ability to stand up for themselves.

bayindirh 6y ago
I can think of two reasons why this happened in the first place. - Either it was good enough in low resolution screens, and algorithm just considered mature and nobody think about it after that. - Or, it was implemented with "first commit which meets requirements wins" competition, and it just didn't get the attention it needed. I'm like you, a big fan of "do it once, do it right", but not everyone understands how well-polishing something presumably small affects everything like a butterfly effect. Some people just want to tick all the boxes and go home. There's no inherent wrong with this, but when combined with wrong constraints and incentives, these things happen.