4 ms·
> Countless users and companies insist on sticking to ancient, niche or legacy platforms and there is nothing we can do about that. Most people, even proprieta
by snakeyjake 3y ago
> Countless users and companies insist on sticking to ancient, niche or legacy platforms and there is nothing we can do about that.
Most people, even proprietary closed source developers, write software where one of the first sentences in its license is something like "This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."
That is inexpensive.
Some people, myself included, develop software where the fitness for purpose is guaranteed and warranties are explicit and absolute.
That is very expensive. And slow.
It makes sense to stick with ancient and niche platforms that have been pored over for 30-40 years by very slow and deliberate developers when someone may die, the environment may be ruined, or millions of dollars in damage may occur if something breaks.
At least that's what I tell myself when staring at Ada on INTEGRITY on PowerPC.
- calvinmorrison 3y ago> It makes sense to stick with ancient and niche platforms that have been pored over for 30-40 years by very slow and deliberate developers when someone may die, the environment may be ruined, or millions of dollars in damage may occur if something breaks. Contradicted yourself in one sentence! If a single person dying is going to cost million dollars of damage, it makes sense to not use software or platforms where the developer pool is a about as big as the number of french Jugglers with Wilsons Disease
- Lacerda69 3y agoI read it as "people will die if there is a breaking change in the software"
- ender341341 3y agoah, good catch, I totally read it as gp did on first read but on re-read I think you're correct.
- sitzkrieg 3y agoada in this day and age is usually a good hint its something that has to work everytime ;)