December 28, 2009 at 4:15 pm
GSquared (12/28/2009)
James Stover (12/27/2009)
I'll go one further - I don't think it's acceptable to have service packs. It's an acknowledgement that a product is defective. Only after an unspecified number of updates (and years) will it work correctly. The worst part is that we accept and, in fact, expect it. It's irritating that MS isn't giving us SP4 this year. But it's even worse that we should even have to expect one.So, you don't change the oil in your car? You don't brush your teeth? You don't clean the gutters on your house (or have someone do it for you)?
We live in a universe where the laws of thermodynamics apply. That means complex systems decay and require an input of energy to maintain. That means software will require updates. Until you live in a universe with different laws of physics, that's going to be true.
I guess what I am wanting to say is that is that the expectation of a service pack is an expectation of a defective product. As a customer, I want to buy a product and have it work. Simple as that. Your examples are maintenance items. If I take your examples and compare to an RTM product, I have oil that damages my engine, a toothbrush that rots my teeth, and gutters that cause rain to pour inside my house. Those things should work - correctly - straight out of the box without the expectation that it will eventually work correctly at some unspecified point in the future after an indefinite number of updates. In this regard, I find service packs unacceptable.
James Stover, McDBA
December 29, 2009 at 7:20 am
James Stover (12/28/2009)
GSquared (12/28/2009)
James Stover (12/27/2009)
I'll go one further - I don't think it's acceptable to have service packs. It's an acknowledgement that a product is defective. Only after an unspecified number of updates (and years) will it work correctly. The worst part is that we accept and, in fact, expect it. It's irritating that MS isn't giving us SP4 this year. But it's even worse that we should even have to expect one.So, you don't change the oil in your car? You don't brush your teeth? You don't clean the gutters on your house (or have someone do it for you)?
We live in a universe where the laws of thermodynamics apply. That means complex systems decay and require an input of energy to maintain. That means software will require updates. Until you live in a universe with different laws of physics, that's going to be true.
I guess what I am wanting to say is that is that the expectation of a service pack is an expectation of a defective product. As a customer, I want to buy a product and have it work. Simple as that. Your examples are maintenance items. If I take your examples and compare to an RTM product, I have oil that damages my engine, a toothbrush that rots my teeth, and gutters that cause rain to pour inside my house. Those things should work - correctly - straight out of the box without the expectation that it will eventually work correctly at some unspecified point in the future after an indefinite number of updates. In this regard, I find service packs unacceptable.
Yeah. You're right. No car has ever had to be subject to a safety recall. Instead, the manufacturer comes to your house and, for free, fixes the problem for you.
Nothing humans do is without risk. Nothing "works perfectly right out of the box". Expecting perfection is living in a fantasy.
If what you are saying were true, we'd still be driving Model A Fords, because they'd "work - correctly - straight out of the box without the expectation that it will eventually work correctly at some unspecified point in the future after an indefinite number of updates". Your car, whatever car you have, is the end result of a huge number of very expensive updates, and they aren't done yet. It still is killing you and everything around you (toxic exhaust fumes), it still requires the timing belt to be replaced ever X-thousand miles, and the oil to be changed more often than that.
Your doctor, in order to correctly diagnose a wide variety of issues, has to put you at risk of horrible death. He'll subject you to potentially carcinogenic X-rays, CAT scans, etc. He'll cut you open and take pieces of your flesh for biopsies. He'll stick needles in you that could potentially be infected with antiobiotic-resistant, flesh-eating staph. And yet all of this is the end result of tens of thousands of years of constant updates and improvements, and is safer and more effective than any prior version of medicine. But iatrogenic disease (illness caused by medical professionals) still kills more people than computer glitches do. That means the bugs in medicine will continue to be patched, often in a monthly fashion through professional publications.
So, if you brush your teeth (exposing yourself to the potentially toxic/carcinogenic chemicals in your toothpaste and toothbrush - plus the risk of choking on the toothbrush or drowning in the toothpaste foam, which are risks that actually do kill people), if you visit a doctor, if you drive a car or just live in the same atmosphere as people who do, you are taking life-threatening risks that are subject to routine, constant "patches and updates" that improve effectiveness and safety.
I could go on indefinitely. Everything you do carries risks. Every human endeavor is subject to refinement over time and use. What makes you think computer software can be different?
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
December 29, 2009 at 8:03 am
GSquared (12/29/2009)
Nothing "works perfectly right out of the box".
BWAA-HAA!!! Speak for yourself! 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 29, 2009 at 9:53 am
Jeff Moden (12/29/2009)
GSquared (12/29/2009)
Nothing "works perfectly right out of the box".BWAA-HAA!!! Speak for yourself! 😉
I am. Trust me, I wasn't born perfect, I had to work for several weeks to achieve it! 😀
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
December 29, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (12/27/2009)I'd stick with SPs. One a year seemed like too few, but I'd be happy if we could just get that one.
I also look forward to an annual service pack for current products.
December 29, 2009 at 10:41 pm
GSquared (12/29/2009)
What makes you think computer software can be different?
What's ironic about that statement is that all software boils down to only two parts... 1's and 0's. I mean, really... how hard can just two parts be? :-):-D:-P;-):hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 30, 2009 at 1:34 am
I could go on indefinitely. Everything you do carries risks. Every human endeavor is subject to refinement over time and use. What makes you think computer software can be different?
You've gone off on a wild tangent. I'm simply stating that expecting a service pack to get a properly working product isn't acceptable. The industry should and can do better. As a paying customer, I have the right to expect a product that works correctly from the very first time I use it. My mind won't be changed about it, either. Why? Because I am the customer and the customer is ALWAYS right 🙂
On a closing note, what is...interesting...about packaged software is that there is no warranty for damages caused by the failure of the product (read any EULA). Interesting, indeed.
James Stover, McDBA
December 30, 2009 at 7:10 am
Jeff Moden (12/29/2009)
GSquared (12/29/2009)
What makes you think computer software can be different?What's ironic about that statement is that all software boils down to only two parts... 1's and 0's. I mean, really... how hard can just two parts be? :-):-D:-P;-):hehe:
Human bodies are made out of four parts: electromagnetic, gravity, strong nuclear, weak nuclear. Under the right conditions, that can be reduced even further. What can go wrong with something with only four simple parts? 😀
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
December 30, 2009 at 7:21 am
James Stover (12/30/2009)
I could go on indefinitely. Everything you do carries risks. Every human endeavor is subject to refinement over time and use. What makes you think computer software can be different?
You've gone off on a wild tangent. I'm simply stating that expecting a service pack to get a properly working product isn't acceptable. The industry should and can do better. As a paying customer, I have the right to expect a product that works correctly from the very first time I use it. My mind won't be changed about it, either. Why? Because I am the customer and the customer is ALWAYS right 🙂
On a closing note, what is...interesting...about packaged software is that there is no warranty for damages caused by the failure of the product (read any EULA). Interesting, indeed.
Okay. Granted. It should work for its basic purpose as-sold. I guess I must be using different software than you, because in my experience, it usually does.
Windows 95 worked for me when I first installed it, on release-date. Same for Windows 98. Same for NT 3.51. Never did use NT 4 or Windows ME, so can't comment on those. XP worked as expected from the day I first installed it, as an upgrade on a Windows 98 computer, on the day it was released to market. Same for Vista.
I've never yet installed a copy of Office that didn't allow me to edit documents and spreadsheets right out of the gate.
I've had similar experiences with Linux and FreeBSD. Haven't had to wait for service packs on those.
Same for a wide variety of antivirus and security software.
Haven't ever installed Mac software, but I've been able to play movies in Quicktime when they've released new versions. Same for Media Player, RealPlayer, and a few others.
When I used to use TurboTax, it always worked for me as-installed. Never had to wait for a service pack on that.
World of Warcraft had server-load issues on lauch-date, but that's because they badly underestimated the sales volume, not because of a missing service pack. (They did patch the client a few times that first week, but I played the game about 2 minutes after the servers went live, so that counts as "out of the box" functionality.)
EverQuest often had patch-of-a-patch-of-a-patch syndrome, but the game was playable right from day one.
Same for EVE Online, City of Heroes, City of Villains, Asheron's Call (though detached arms bothered me, the software did work as advertised), and so on.
Sins of a Solar Empire, Age of Empires, Warcraft, Sim City, Civilization, Spore, and dozens of other games have all worked for me as-released. Some required updates for one thing or another, but they did what they were supposed to when I installed them.
I did once have a problem with a video driver that was obsolete when I installed the hardware, and I had to get the driver online instead of using what was on the CD in the box, but that's just that one time that I can remember.
SQL 2000, SQL 2005, and SQL 2008 all processed data for me before they were patched.
So, what software have you been using that doesn't work when you install it? I've listed dozens of things that do, including much of the most common software out there. That's all personal, direct experience on my part.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
January 18, 2010 at 10:43 pm
I have cited your editorial on the Service Pack availability at http://forums.asp.net/p/1515682/3625549.aspx#3625549
I note that as of writing this that 882 people have voted for Service Pack 4 for SQL Server 2005 with only 1 against.
For SQL Server 2008 Service Pack 2, the current tally is 562 for and only 1 against.
Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 24 (of 24 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply