craigb

 
I wonder how many people even know that four bits is called a "nibble" any more?

Ooo I do! Me! Me! I read Charle's Petzold's "Code" not so long ago and was enlightened with this and many other "nibbles" of archaic computer terminology. Great book. 

So is Kerrigan and Richie next?  Or Grace Hopper?

I don't believe any of the excuses about hundreds of millions of possible things to test for. It's a distraction. It's Wizard of Oz smoke and mirror type stuff.

Software can work more perfectly than stuff manufactured from dirt and goo.

Software, like a DAW, only has to do a few things. It doesn't actually do hundreds of millions of things.

We all pretty much want a DAW to be a DAW.

So when an EFX channel strip flickers on and off while we are playing back... that's a bug. Fix it or swim for shore.

When the Loop record function cuts off tiny snippets of audio, leaving a gap and throwing it away for 10 versions in a row. That's a bug. Fix it or end up with frustrated end users.

When the stereo inter leave button swaps modes in the back ground versions, every time you hit "record", well... that was a bug often times excused as "intended misbehavior". It got fixed after years of petitioning. Finally, one particular guy at DAWquarters listened carefully and instead of offering excuses he took the time to understand the nature of the complaint and by the next update that pernicious and frustrating decade old bug was fixed! Yeah man.

I don't buy any of the excuses.

Software with a bunch of bugs reflects the practical circumstances of the company that produces it.



Internal Combustion engines? Now, that's some complex stuff. :-)



:-)

craigb


In the industry, we prefer to call them "features."

HTH.

As an IT guy I once knew used to say - "It's absolutely riddled with features."
 
Leaving these forums aside for the moment, I sometimes have to try to replicate bugs before passing them on to programmers, I certainly see a lot of "bugs" reported that are either user error or the program behaving in the intended way, but not the way the users wants or expects.
 
I think there is a distinction to be made between bugs and design flaws. If there is a design flaw the program works exactly as designed (it was a bad design), if there is a bug it does not work as designed.