Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!think!barmar
From: barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: FullWrite Update
Message-ID: <11882@think.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Nov-87 14:16:17 EST
Article-I.D.: think.11882
Posted: Mon Nov 16 14:16:17 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Nov-87 03:47:19 EST
References: <424@ur-tut.UUCP> <1743@cognos.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@think.UUCP
Reply-To: barmar@sauron.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 54

In article <1743@cognos.UUCP> roberts@cognos.UUCP (Robert Stanley) writes:
>In article <424@ur-tut.UUCP> dhac@ur-tut.UUCP (Darren Jay Hacker) writes:
>
>>I just got off the phone with those *nice* people at Ann Arbor.  They said:
>
>>	1. FullWrite Professional has been completed*.  They are working
>>		on removing the known and pin-pointed bugs in the program.
>
>>	* Or so they say
>
>Even if this was only reportage of a telephone conversation with a
>keep-the-customers-happy person, it makes a disturbing statement.  How can
>a program of any kind, let alone a commercial product, have been completed
>while programmers are still fixing it?

Presumably what is mean is that all the intended features have been
implemented, testing has found some bugs, and they are now being
fixed.  This is generally one of the last technical steps in getting a
software product out (there are still non-technical steps such as
packaging).

>This posting is not really a flame at Ann Arbor Softworks, but at an industry,
>because I have a horrible suspicion that this statement reflects an attitude
>which is endemic in the business.  I once owned a successful software company,
>and if I think about it, there were reflections of such a way of thought right
>there at home.  So what hope is there for turning this around?  The Mac
>interface introduced a whole new way of thinking about computers.  The
>LaserWriter introduced a whole new way of thinking about publishing.  Any
>chance that Apple will come up with a whole new way of thinking about
>delivering *trustworthy* software?

That seems like what they are doing -- trying to deliver trustworthy
software, by finding and fixing the bugs before, rather than after,
shipping.  They don't want to be flamed at like Microsoft was when
they shipped Word 3.0 and everyone started stumbling over the bugs.

Until we have programmers who can write large programs without bugs,
most programs will go through the state where they are completed but
not finished.

This certainly isn't unique to software.  For example, you can buy a
house with a basement, or you can get one with a "finished" basement.
You certainly wouldn't show off an unfinished basement; it's only good
for very limited uses.  But you can throw a party in a finished
basement.  The analogy isn't perfect (an unfinished basement doesn't
accidentally erase your data file, although it might not be safe to
walk on it barefoot), but the idea is right.

---
Barry Margolin
Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com
seismo!think!barmar