D&C GLug - Home Page

[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]

Re: [LUG] Software warranties are for mugs

 

Thanks,  I may have mis understood the original posting,

paul

Neil Williams wrote:

>On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 19:25:43 +0000
>Paul Sutton <zleap@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>How do you define fitness for purpose it was sold for,
>>    
>>
>
>There are clear definitions for such terms - generally the description
>of the item and any specific claims.
>  
>
>>if you buy a toaster then you use that for making toast,
>>    
>>
>
>or other bread-related products (ask Talkie Toaster for a full list).
>
>  
>
>>software on the other hand can be used for anything,
>>    
>>
>
>Not true. A specific piece of software can only do one job. A word
>processor cannot compile a kernel, a graphics program doesn't handle
>DNS itself, nor can it wash your dishes or get you a beer.
>
>  
>
>> a word
>>processor to custom made software,   if you ask too much of it
>>sometimes that particular piece of software may fall over,   and fail
>>to perfom on that task,
>>    
>>
>
>If that task is part of the claims of the program (as expressed by the
>packaging / help documentation), then that is a bug. Even if it is not
>specifically part of the claims of the program, a crash is ALWAYS a bug
>because the program should handle invalid input with an error message,
>not a crash.
>
>  
>
>> which is why I think this disclaimer is
>>important,   also why we  have acronyms like Your Mileage May Vary,
>>you can't predict what someone will use the software for,   and
>>therefore can't make promises regarding perfomance.
>>    
>>
>
>Rubbish. You cannot predict what a *modified* version of the software
>could do but the programmer has to explicitly know what the software
>can be used to do. If a user is able to use the program to do something
>that the programmer did not anticipate, that's another bug - the
>functionality should be documented and handled otherwise future updates
>could cause it to be lost.
>
>Crashes are bugs, undocumented features are bugs, anything a program
>does that is unexpected is also a bug.
>  
>
>>Anti Virus software is good at it's job,  but only if kept up
>>todate, at somepoint,  a virus will come out that it does not know
>>about and that may get through,   now if a user has clicked on en
>>e-mail attachment and activated the virus,  the software fails you
>>can't go blame the anti virus vendor,
>>    
>>
>
>That's different, that is a clearly documented part of the use of the
>program.
>
>  
>
>>same would go for filtering software,  it can't filter every site out
>>there,  new sites appear all the time,  so the software does the best
>>job it can' but they need the disclaimer just in case something nasty
>>gets  through.
>>    
>>
>
>Heuristics.
>
>--
>
>Neil Williams
>=============
>http://www.data-freedom.org/
>http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
>http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
>  
>


-- 
http://www.zleap.net
http://www.openoffice.org
http://www.linux.org

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1
GIT d S: a  C+++ UL++++ P+ L++ W++ N+ W--- 
O! V!  PS+ Y! t+++ 5 X+++ R tv- b- 
DI! D++ G e H! r! z?

-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK----


-- 
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html