> Why does everybody think it's expensive to design and test software 
> properly?

Umm, because if MS spent another 6 months designing certain parts of Windows 
better and testing it more thoroughly, that would cost 6 months of salaries 
(plus all the other costs to run those departments) and also 6 months of 
lost sales.  In short, they have to decide when to release the product for 
maximum profit, and it will always be before they've fixed all bugs.

> There's plenty of non-M$ software which works reliably enough to not cause 
> a problem.

Sure, there's also apples that taste different to pears.

> (And let's face it, M$ isn't exactly short of cash...)

Did you ever stop to think that if they designed and tested more thoroughly 
they might have *less* cash?  I'm sure MS has already stopped and though 
about exactly this, and TBH I think they are in a much better position to 
decide how much (re)design and testing to do than you are.

Post a reply to this message