Jere Lull wrote in
news:2008013121245350073-jerelull@maccom:

On 2008-01-31 14:27:03 -0500, Geoff Schultz
said:

Expecting the developers to add in code to check for rare events like
this just doesn't happen.

Sorry, but I'm a developer and I program the odd-event handlers first
because I *need* that info when things go "bang".

Okay, I'm an exception because my programs must work 100% of the time
or say what was wrong so the problem can be fixed fast. For some
reason, when you manage 10-20 billion dollars' investments, they want
things to balance to the penny every day.

Still, I can attest it really takes no real effort to output error
messages whenever some action gives an unexpected result.

An "odd event" is different from a program going "bang." I would be
willing to bet that you don't do range checking on all of the data that you
input from disk or a database. Most of the time you assume that it's
right. If a program goes "bang", it's easy to have specific or generic
error handlers to output that an error occurred and what was going on at
the time. The software for the C series has exactly such an error log. We
never got to that stage of debugging.

To me it's obvious that cognisense didn't want to fix the problem. He only
wanted his money back. I asked many questions and none of them were
answered, or if they were, only in the most generic sense. I, and others,
offered many suggestions and from what I could tell, none of them were
acted upon.

I really dislike that fact that he appeared in this group under the guise
of disclosing how awful the C120 is, when all that he wanted to do was to
use it as a bargaining chip with RayMarine. It amazes me that as a
"programmer and system architect" that he had never explored the System
Integration menus which can provide a tremendous amount of information on
what's going on within the system.

I used to run an Internet company and many times we had customers publicly
blast us over issues which they thought were ours. Sometimes they were our
problems, but MANY times they were on the behalf of the customer. I always
appreciated it when knowledgeable customers stepped up on our behalf. I
guess that I was trying to do that and at the same time, fix his problems.

-- Geoff
www.GeoffSchultz.org

Jere Lull wrote:
On 2008-01-31 14:27:03 -0500, Geoff Schultz
said:

Expecting the developers to add in code to check for rare events like
this just doesn't happen.

Sorry, but I'm a developer and I ... when you manage 10-20 billion
dollars' investments..

Yeah, I kind of bristled at that one also. I'm a developer too, and
produce software for medical labs. Because of the potential liability
involved (not to mention peoples health), our customers are pretty picky
too. I actually spend much of my time developing interfaces between the
analyzers in the lab and our system. Diagnostics are designed in from
the ground up. There's nothing worse than when something doesn't work
and it doesn't give you any clue as to why it's not working.

--
Dan Best
s/v Tricia Jean, Tayana 37 #192

In article ,
Dan BEst wrote:


Expecting the developers to add in code to check for rare events like
this just doesn't happen.

Sorry, but I'm a developer and I ... when you manage 10-20 billion
dollars' investments..

Yeah, I kind of bristled at that one also. I'm a developer too, and
produce software for medical labs. Because of the potential liability
involved (not to mention peoples health), our customers are pretty picky
too. I actually spend much of my time developing interfaces between the
analyzers in the lab and our system. Diagnostics are designed in from
the ground up. There's nothing worse than when something doesn't work
and it doesn't give you any clue as to why it's not working.

--
Dan Best
s/v Tricia Jean, Tayana 37 #192

Ahhh, but there is a GIANT difference between what RayMarine firmware is
designed to do, and what your Multi-Million Dollar Investment Software,
or your Healthcare software is designed to do. RayMarine is a "Consumer"
level Firmware system, and needs to fit in caparativly Small Codespace,
when balanced against the Stuff you guys are writing. Why would ANYONE,
with any sense of software smarts, expect to get anything more from
RayMarine, than they get from their Whirlpool Washing Machine, or their
Kitchen Stove? These are Consumer Products, of limited Production runs,
and your expectations are for Mission Critical Software.... Does anyone
else figure these guys are just whiner's......

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

Bruce in alaska wrote:

Ahhh, but there is a GIANT difference between what RayMarine firmware is
designed to do, and what your Multi-Million Dollar Investment Software,
or your Healthcare software is designed to do.

Bruce, I'm not trying to get into any kind of a ****ing contest or
anything, and I certainly accept your point. When you are creating a
product, there are a lot of things you have to balance (not the least of
which is the sales end of the organization's desire to get it out the
door yesterday). Also, features sell the thing, while great diagnostics
will only enhance your reputation among a relative small group of
technicians, resulting in few, if any, additional sales. Often times
though, those same diagnostics save money in the long run. It's just
hard to sell that to the company exec's.

As to the code space requirements, I just don't buy that. Sure, there
was a time when I counted clock cycles and bytes (back in the early '80s
when I was building machines with embedded processors), but those days
are long gone. At the scale we are speaking, memory size and processor
cycles are basically available for the taking.

All that being said, I agree with you that it is bad form for someone
who has a problem with an installation he did himself to seek bargaining
power with the company by posting videos, etc. without ever bringing an
expert in to go over the installation.

RayMarine is a "Consumer"
level Firmware system, and needs to fit in caparativly Small Codespace,
when balanced against the Stuff you guys are writing. Why would ANYONE,
with any sense of software smarts, expect to get anything more from
RayMarine, than they get from their Whirlpool Washing Machine, or their
Kitchen Stove? These are Consumer Products, of limited Production runs,
and your expectations are for Mission Critical Software.... Does anyone
else figure these guys are just whiner's......



--
Dan Best
s/v Tricia Jean, Tayana 37 #192
http://home.comcast.net/~triciajean192/

On Feb 1, 12:40 pm, Bruce in alaska wrote:

Why would ANYONE, with any sense of software smarts,
expect to get anything more from RayMarine,
than they get from their Whirlpool Washing Machine, or their
Kitchen Stove?

I didn't buy my kitchen stove to help me navigate.

wrote in message
...
On Feb 1, 12:40 pm, Bruce in alaska wrote:

Why would ANYONE, with any sense of software smarts,
expect to get anything more from RayMarine,
than they get from their Whirlpool Washing Machine, or their
Kitchen Stove?

I didn't buy my kitchen stove to help me navigate.



Don't be modest... LOL

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 23:25:56 +0000, Ian Malcolm
wrote:

I've built that interface circuit and it does work. Hyperterm
definately wont do the job. Larry must be confusing Seatalk with NMEA.

Or he's got a Seatalk to NMEA converter somewhere.

http://www.landfallnav.com/ee85001.html

http://brookhouseonline.com/seatalk.htm

http://www.tklinux.de/seatalkBoard.html

Wayne.B wrote in
:

I've built that interface circuit and it does work. Hyperterm
definately wont do the job. Larry must be confusing Seatalk with NMEA.



No, you can see the streams of Seatalk with hyperterm....

If there is NOISE OR RF INTERFERENCE OR SOME SEATALK GOING CRAZY Hyperterm
will fill with graphic gibberish! You don't have to decode the Seatalk to
see the crap in there with it....

Larry, I'd like to discuss some of these topics via email -
can you please contact me at google atsign cognisense dot com?

Thanks, Keith

wrote in news:4237979d-40d7-4438-8874-7b45510d5828
@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

can you please contact me at google atsign cognisense dot com?



Sure, but you're too late to hide the address because it shows up in your
message header. You might want to change that to a fake one to get it away
from the spambots.

I'll email you...