Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 21:53:17 +0200 From: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> To: <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Anti-Unix Site Runs Unix Message-ID: <011f01c1dc12$5dadd540$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <A0B14BDC-47B2-11D6-BF98-003065D5E9A4@carrel.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
William writes: > A) Microsoft hires mainly smart people True, although not as much so nowadays as in the past (there's a lot more deadwood in the company than there used to be, with many useless layers of management). > B) Microsoft develops software in a kit-bash > sort of manner without adequate testing, > documentation, and communication between teams True, but so does just about every other company writing PC software these days. It's an industry problem, not a Microsoft problem. And it predates Microsoft. > C) People who write code in a professional > manner often quit working for Microsoft No. It's just that finding people who write code that way in the first place is extremely difficult. Most developers have nothing like the discipline required to document and structure code in a maintainable way, and there are too few developers who have these qualities for any company to hold out for them in hiring. Software engineers who insist on a very disciplined coding environment are not likely to stay at Microsoft or at any other PC software company, because virtually none of them knows anything about discipline in coding. Some NASA contractors might be good environments for such engineers, though. > D) People who write code in a professional > manner are smart. Agreed. Most developers are probably brighter than average, but they are not geniuses. In addition, there exists a substantial minority of developers who aren't above average at all in intelligence, but just happen to enjoy writing code. Their code usually leaves much to be desired, and there communication skills are typically nonexistent (making it impossible for them to document anything). > So I reject your assertion about the relative > intelligence most of Microsoft's employees > compared to those elsewhere (at Sun or Apple, > for example). I don't know enough about Sun or Apple to assess the intelligence of their employees. Given that both have produced some extremely cutting-edge technologies, it is clear that at least some of their employees are extremely bright indeed. But I don't know how the averages work out; Apple in particular isn't a very successful company, for a company that presumably would have intelligent employees. I infer from Netscape's extremely poor business performance and from stories I have heard of the company that its employees in general were not especially smart. > Microsoft's employees are probably on par with > most other large technical organizations > intelligence-wise. I tend to disagree. Microsoft employees definitely seem a bit brighter. However, this has evolved over the years, as I've mentioned, and there are a lot more dim bulbs there now than in the past (since the company can now afford to carry some dead weight). > Maybe subpar in some ethical ways since they > are associated with an enterprise that has > committed fairly aggregious violations of U.S. > and European anti-trust law. Keep in mind that (1) any irregular activities were almost certainly the work of a small number of persons at Microsoft, and probably not the smart ones; and (2) every company in a similar position engages in similar activities, so there is nothing uniquely evil about Microsoft. > Somehow, I've managed to avoid a variety of > ad hominem attacks that are pretty obvious > from looking at your historical posts to FreeBSD > groups, your homepage, and your physical > distance from Microsoft's main campus. Good. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?011f01c1dc12$5dadd540$0a00000a>