3 ms·

> Having the computer boot in five seconds There are certainly more modern options that allow that and it's highly doubtful that specifically is particularly r

> Having the computer boot in five seconds There are certainly more modern options that allow that and it's highly doubtful that specifically is particularly relevant for Southwest. Not that there is any evidence that they're actually using 3.1 for anything? > that this is software that has been working for three decades Or it's so buggy or designed (or more likely updated) so poorly that everyone is afraid to touch it. e.g. I doubt there are many (even any?) practical reasons for airlines to use GDS besides the cost and complexity involved in designing an entirely new system and somehow forcing all other airlines to switch to it?

shagie 2y ago
> Not that there is any evidence that they're actually using 3.1 for anything? Windows 3.1? No. I'd even say there's no evidence that windows 95 is being used but rather that they've got what appears to be some old software with older design. https://www.dallasnews.com/business/airlines/2022/12/30/whats-the-problem-with-southwest-airlines-scheduling-system/ https://www.dallasnews.com/business/airlines/2022/12/30/what... > 2. The crew scheduling system is the main culprit. > Southwest uses internally built and maintained systems called SkySolver and Crew Web Access for pilots and flight attendants. They can sign on to those systems to pick flights and then make changes when flights are canceled or delayed or when there is an illness. > “Southwest has generated systems internally themselves instead of using more standard programs that others have used,” Montgomery said. “Some systems even look historic like they were designed on Windows 95.” Screen shots of this are in http://www3.alpa.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=IO7kd%2Bfm2Do%3D&tabid=11702&mid=33968 http://www3.alpa.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=IO7kd%2Bfm2Do... Unfortunately, I don't know the nuances of Microsoft Windows UI well enough to be able to pick out which OS version is running the software in those screen shots. --- > Or it's so buggy or designed (or more likely updated) so poorly that everyone is afraid to touch it. That is a very common occurrence (I'm dealing with that now ... a .jar file that hasn't been rebuilt in 15 years). The big rewrite is something that comes with one part excitement (I can do it right this time!) and dread (oh my, that's how much code that I need to retest?!). I was involved in the tail end of a 3 year project at one company with some software that replaced previously running DOS (and yes, it was DOS - they had an C and assembly guru employed who's job it was to remove / optimize code in the binary to get it to fit into 640k) to a Java Web Start (which was a neat technology) and the millions of lines of software that monstrosity had and needed to be debugged and fixed. While they're in a better spot now (can use modern hardware), and its something that they can build in house (a major part of the reason to do it was to drop the external contractor who didn't like maintaining the C code) ... but that also came with the added complexity of the software that they licensed and the maintenance and deployment of that software. Before they could put the software on a floppy and have it shipped to each location ... now its a big bigger and more complex of a deployment (that was built with duct tape and chewing gum one night to do diff deployments of specific class files rather than trying to push the entirety down the pipe for each location). My rambling point is that we are moving forward with complexity - and that allows us to manage more complex situations, but it comes at the cost of managing that additional complexity of the infrastructure and software it needs and that cost is ongoing and not always taken into account.
- jwagenet 2y ago
  Those screenshots look more like WinXP to me with the rounded and shaded button elements. It’s the boring grey and buttons people presumably associate with the 90s.
spookie 2y ago
Most times its less about a system being poorly designed and more about it being able to solve very hard problems which most existing employees today haven't even heard of. Institutional knowledge plays big time on these decisions.

shagie 2y ago

> Not that there is any evidence that they're actually using 3.1 for anything? Windows 3.1? No. I'd even say there's no evidence that windows 95 is being used but rather that they've got what appears to be some old software with older design. https://www.dallasnews.com/business/airlines/2022/12/30/whats-the-problem-with-southwest-airlines-scheduling-system/ https://www.dallasnews.com/business/airlines/2022/12/30/what... > 2. The crew scheduling system is the main culprit. > Southwest uses internally built and maintained systems called SkySolver and Crew Web Access for pilots and flight attendants. They can sign on to those systems to pick flights and then make changes when flights are canceled or delayed or when there is an illness. > “Southwest has generated systems internally themselves instead of using more standard programs that others have used,” Montgomery said. “Some systems even look historic like they were designed on Windows 95.” Screen shots of this are in http://www3.alpa.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=IO7kd%2Bfm2Do%3D&tabid=11702&mid=33968 http://www3.alpa.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=IO7kd%2Bfm2Do... Unfortunately, I don't know the nuances of Microsoft Windows UI well enough to be able to pick out which OS version is running the software in those screen shots. --- > Or it's so buggy or designed (or more likely updated) so poorly that everyone is afraid to touch it. That is a very common occurrence (I'm dealing with that now ... a .jar file that hasn't been rebuilt in 15 years). The big rewrite is something that comes with one part excitement (I can do it right this time!) and dread (oh my, that's how much code that I need to retest?!). I was involved in the tail end of a 3 year project at one company with some software that replaced previously running DOS (and yes, it was DOS - they had an C and assembly guru employed who's job it was to remove / optimize code in the binary to get it to fit into 640k) to a Java Web Start (which was a neat technology) and the millions of lines of software that monstrosity had and needed to be debugged and fixed. While they're in a better spot now (can use modern hardware), and its something that they can build in house (a major part of the reason to do it was to drop the external contractor who didn't like maintaining the C code) ... but that also came with the added complexity of the software that they licensed and the maintenance and deployment of that software. Before they could put the software on a floppy and have it shipped to each location ... now its a big bigger and more complex of a deployment (that was built with duct tape and chewing gum one night to do diff deployments of specific class files rather than trying to push the entirety down the pipe for each location). My rambling point is that we are moving forward with complexity - and that allows us to manage more complex situations, but it comes at the cost of managing that additional complexity of the infrastructure and software it needs and that cost is ongoing and not always taken into account.

jwagenet 2y ago
Those screenshots look more like WinXP to me with the rounded and shaded button elements. It’s the boring grey and buttons people presumably associate with the 90s.

spookie 2y ago

Most times its less about a system being poorly designed and more about it being able to solve very hard problems which most existing employees today haven't even heard of. Institutional knowledge plays big time on these decisions.