"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:04:53 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


We shouldn't have to fiddle that much to make software work correctly.

I would agree, but...

Proper requirements gathering and design are supposed to take care of
these
things,

I'm not a proponent of one size fits all. You can dumb down software
to the point that *anybody* can use it at the expense of
conformability.

You're talking about eliminating customization. I'm talking about
eliminating the need to tweak, just to get your work done. There's quite a
difference.


Say what you will about
Microsoft, but in terms of what they do BEFORE the coding begins, their
process is almost perfect.


Too bad the product doesn't follow suit... not a week goes by that I
don't have to download some patch or other.... or, until Win2000
experience the BSD every day or so.....

Apples and oranges. Yes, MS has security problems, and they're worse than
GWB, in terms of covering up the truth until the computer press blows their
cover. But: Try and make a list of 10 things you absolutely hate about Excel
or Word, in terms of USABILITY.


Give people their due. Micro$oft has not hired all of the good
thinkers and coders in the world..... there is some really good
software out there that lacks Micro$oft's advertising budget.

Of course! I'm simply pointing out that Microsoft gets slammed on a
wholesale basis because of their security issues. If you follow all the
press about their products, though, you find little or nothing negative
about USABILITY. That's where they did their homework.