Why Software Sucks

Earlier this year I enjoyed reading David Platt's 'Why Software Sucks', in which he discusses why software is regarded so poorly by so many people. It was entertaining, well written and contained a fair amount of wisdom. I'd certainly recommend it to anyone considering writing any software with a user interface.

I was reminded of the book today, when this masterpiece popped up on my screen (Click on it to see it full size):


I've read it several times now and I'm still not sure what it means. I'm pretty certain that I'm not likely to trust any site that asks questions like that. I'm also sure that I don't really trust the test and QA processes of any organisation that lets software like that out of the door.

To make matters worse, there is no way to tell this baffling and irritating dialog to go away. Choose 'No' and it will reappear every time you go back to the page that launched it.

It is always nice to have your prejudices reinforced (I'm not a massive Microsoft fan), and I did really enjoy the slightly theatrical rant I was able to have as a result. But my employer forces me to use this software, and I think I'd really rather they didn't, particularly when there are a number of open-source alternatives that treat their users with a little more respect.

P.S. I initially thought that it was another display of suckiness that it wasn't possible to tell Blogger to upload the picture of the dialog full size - but to do so would ruin the design of the page, so it's probably OK.

Quality Software Development - Science or Art?

In a thoughtful and well reasoned post on Sys-Con, Dirk Morris draws on the arguments in Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance to put forward the view that software development is both Science and Art. Rather more interestingly he suggests that Open Source tends more towards the science, and proprietary software tends more towards the art, citing Apple's OS X as the prime example - open source engineering at the core, with proprietary eye candy on top.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Mad Old Men

I took my son J (13) to his first real gig on Sunday. We went to see the Blockheads at the Stables in Milton Keynes. J isn't a big Blockheads fan (although he might be now), but he's a pretty good musician and singer, so I thought he'd enjoy it. After 3 songs, he turned to me a said with a big grin "they're just a bunch of mad old men". I guess they are, but after 30 years of playing together they are an unbelievably good band; with some absolutely classic old material as well as some surprisingly good new stuff it all adds up to a great night out.
I've seen them three times now in the last year or so, twice at Cox's Yard in Stratford upon Avon and this time at the Stables. The Stables is a nice venue, set up by John Dankworth and Cleo Laine, but Cox's suits the Blockheads better - something I think Johnny Turnbull had in mind when he asked the audience to give themselves a round of applause for staying sat down all night. On the other hand, if we'd been at Cox's J would have difficulty seeing anything - neither of us are particularly tall.
Anyway, overall we really enjoyed it, the nearly two hours of their set passed very quickly (certainly much more quickly than the 40 minutes of the support act, which was absolute torture). If you get the chance to go and see them, don't miss out!

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Specialized Defroster Shoes

Cold feet are not something I have ever really suffered from - at least, not unless they were soaking wet. So I've been cycling offroad year-round in a pair of lightweight summer cycling shoes for a quite some time. The uppers are largely mesh, so they do tend to fill with water/mud fairly frequently in winter riding. Usually, on the wetsuit principle, the water/mud warms up and after the initial unpleasantness my feet are OK again, but when it is really cold this doesn't always work, and does tend to provoke some protest from the kind person who washes my socks. So when I found myself in the Specialized Concept Store and saw a pair of Defrosters I thought I'd give them a try.

I bought a pair of size 44 rather than my usual 43, and I despite going up a size I can't fit my feet in with anything but my thinnest socks on as they are too narrow. Despite that , my feet have been extremely warm on all of my recent rides. Of course, as soon as I bought them the rains stopped and the trails got dryer than I've ever seen them at this time of year, but today in the rain, mud and severe winds they got a proper test and passed with flying colours. It was very comforting to have such warm, dry feet in such inclement conditions.

These are my third pair of Specialized shoes, but the first for a few years and the first that I have found to be too narrow. Perhaps they now use a different last?

Apart from the width issue, the only other issue I have with them is that clearance for Crank Brothers pedals is pretty marginal - you need to fit the shims provided with the cleats, and even then clipping in is not as easy as it should be.

There really isn't much choice in the winter mtb shoe market, and finding a shop with anything in stock seems to be a major challenge. In fact, I think this was the first time I had found any winter show in stock in my size, so I didn't really get much choice. So overall, I guess I'd give them a 6 out of 10.

Can outsourcing save money?

The AA has decided to bring its datacentre operation back in house to save money. This isn't very surprising if you stop to think about the basic economics, but it does seem quite brave of them to admit that the outsource decision was flawed. It has always seemed unlikely to me that you could save money by outsourcing infrastructure in this way, unless your in house setup was totally incompetent (in which case fixing it would seem to be the better option). Unlike in the early days of facilities management, there is no option to save money by consolidation workload onto fewer mainframes, so the cost model for the outsourcer is likely to be the same as yours - add in a profit margin and account management overheads and you are paying more. Even worse is the degree to which your ability to support your business is compromised. I have worked on accounts with some large infrastructure outsourcers over the past year and the striking thing is how long it now takes to make any changes - and how much it costs.

The other interesting thing about this news item was the decision to accept a lower level of availability - 99.5% instead of the 99.9% or more that is usually asked for. Like Google's practice of running their datacentres rather hotter than is considered normal, it suggests that there are a few bits of conventional wisdom that could do with revisiting.  All it takes is a clear look at the numbers