Windows Vista is slowing the Navy down ??

  • Thread starter Thread starter hsyq8xg
  • Start date Start date
Moshe Goldfarb said:
Not at all.

The thing fscked up.

I'm just wondering if Java was what fscked it up.
Click to expand...

Might have been who ever NASA used as the subcontracter. Remember how
Lockheed Martin went off and put English standard units into equations
designed for Metric units and got the Mars Climate Orbiter clobbered?

When I went to college in the mid 1980's our physics book used metric so I
couldn't understand this. I mean why on Earth would anyone outside the
automotive industry use English standard units?!
 
Might have been who ever NASA used as the subcontracter. Remember how
Lockheed Martin went off and put English standard units into equations
designed for Metric units and got the Mars Climate Orbiter clobbered?
Click to expand...

I believe they did a similar thing with the Hubble as well.
One team was using English the other metric.

Personally, as an Engineer, I could never understand the reasoning for
Englsih vs MKS.
When I went to college in the mid 1980's our physics book used metric so I
couldn't understand this. I mean why on Earth would anyone outside the
automotive industry use English standard units?!
Click to expand...

The problem is thinking and converting.

Example: Typical American (like me) knows a foot is *this long* (stretch
your arms out) but has no idea how big a meter is.
They are constantly trying to convert which makes a mess of things.

If they were taught in terms of MKS their would be no problem.
 
dennis@home said:
A poor troll..
the important bit is

“Software gets slower because the data operating over a network is
increasing faster than computer processing rates,” Hull said.

Some satellites generate several gigabytes of data per second, Hull
said. “The next generation may be terabytes of information per
second,” he said. “If a computer has to deal with 100 times or 1,000
times the amount of data today than it did yesterday, it’s going to be
swamped.”
<<<<<


Its the same for all OSes so you can insert any OS you like and the post
means the same.

In fact you probably can't insert windows there at all as its unlikely to
run the processing of terabytes of data from a satellite and it certainly
will not be Vista as it hasn't been around long enough and is a desktop
OS.
Click to expand...

Erm, doesn't the military have operating systems that are top secret? If
they use windows or any of the other large operating systems it's for normal
stuff like record keeping and files. They don't guide satellites or missiles
with it or navigate ships.
 
Canuck57 said:
It still highlights the general poor quality of MS-Windows programming
methodologies spilling into serious software development cycles and today's
design techniques. While software has become more complex, it is also true
the teams developing it are much larger, better funded and generally less
disciplined. We somehow think a business NET ad-hoc programmer makes a
embedded systems programmer, and that is a fallacy for greed.
Click to expand...

What a load of uninformed bullshit.
 
The Natural Philosopher said:
Sounds pretty accurate to me, having worked on just such teams in the
past.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the MS Windows programming methodologies comment. The
"less disciplined" bit is crap too. Most projects are so damn
disciplined these days they have certificates coming out of their cracks
but very little SW. OSS is a different kettle of fish - almost zero
discipline and "yet another copycat program" every other day.
 
Moshe Goldfarb said:
I believe they did a similar thing with the Hubble as well.
One team was using English the other metric.

Personally, as an Engineer, I could never understand the reasoning for
Englsih vs MKS.


The problem is thinking and converting.

Example: Typical American (like me) knows a foot is *this long* (stretch
your arms out) but has no idea how big a meter is.
Click to expand...

I guess it is all a matter of when you grew up. My youth was filled with
those little metric shows on PBS that were basically 30 min PSAs. I still
remember that a meter is just a little longer than a yard, a dime is about
1 mm in thickness, and that a cubic decimeter = 1 liter = 1 kilogram which
is around 2.2 pounds. I also remember the old pint is a pound (ie 16
ounces) of the common system as well.
They are constantly trying to convert which makes a mess of things.

If they were taught in terms of MKS their would be no problem.
Click to expand...

Strange thing is that the University of Utah taught ALL its physics courses
in metric in the mid 1980's. I guess I thought that is the way all
universities of that time taught their courses.
 
Steve said:
I don't see anywhere in this article where they say what OSs they are
using.
Click to expand...

There are a number of different operating systems in use at the US-armed
forces including Linux and microsoft. The recent years DARPA has
financed quite many Linux based projects, of course those projects
usually aren't for desktop use, and of course it's cheaper to blow up a
computer with Linux than one with microsoft, as you may loose the
license when you no longer have the original hardware left, otherwise
those missiles would need to eject the on board "computer" and the NAVY
SEALS has to do "rescue" missions to retrieve those machines ;)
 
I guess it is all a matter of when you grew up. My youth was filled with
those little metric shows on PBS that were basically 30 min PSAs. I still
remember that a meter is just a little longer than a yard, a dime is about
1 mm in thickness, and that a cubic decimeter = 1 liter = 1 kilogram which
is around 2.2 pounds. I also remember the old pint is a pound (ie 16
ounces) of the common system as well.


Strange thing is that the University of Utah taught ALL its physics courses
in metric in the mid 1980's. I guess I thought that is the way all
universities of that time taught their courses.
Click to expand...

They taught both systems when I was in engineering school in the late 70's
but the MKS system was used for the courses and the English system was just
taught to illustrate the differences.
 
Bruce said:
I guess it is all a matter of when you grew up. My youth was filled with
those little metric shows on PBS that were basically 30 min PSAs. I still
remember that a meter is just a little longer than a yard, a dime is about
1 mm in thickness, and that a cubic decimeter = 1 liter = 1 kilogram which
is around 2.2 pounds. I also remember the old pint is a pound (ie 16
ounces) of the common system as well.


Strange thing is that the University of Utah taught ALL its physics courses
in metric in the mid 1980's. I guess I thought that is the way all
universities of that time taught their courses.
Click to expand...


Well US standards ARE based on the metric system

http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/

And this is from Wikipedia

The use of two different systems was the root cause in the loss of the
Mars Climate Orbiter in 1998. NASA specified metric units in the
contract. NASA and other organizations worked in metric units but one
subcontractor, Lockheed Martin, provided thruster performance data to
the team in pound force seconds instead of newton seconds. The
spacecraft was intended to orbit Mars at about 150 kilometers (93 mi)
altitude, but the incorrect data meant that it probably descended
instead to about 57 kilometers (35 mi), burning up in the Martian
atmosphere.
 
Moshe Goldfarb said:
I believe they did a similar thing with the Hubble as well.
One team was using English the other metric.

Personally, as an Engineer, I could never understand the reasoning for
Englsih vs MKS.


The problem is thinking and converting.

Example: Typical American (like me) knows a foot is *this long* (stretch
your arms out) but has no idea how big a meter is.
They are constantly trying to convert which makes a mess of things.

If they were taught in terms of MKS their would be no problem.
Click to expand...

Anyone in engineering and science had better know MKS. Not 100% sure of
this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? Even the
British sell gas by the litre.
 
The Natural Philosopher said:
Sounds pretty accurate to me, having worked on just such teams in the
past.
Click to expand...

Maybe Hadron never worked on a well run, smooth, reliable, well performing
large scale software development project that was also on budget and on
time. Many have not had this experience.
 
Canuck57 said:
Anyone in engineering and science had better know MKS. Not 100% sure of
this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? Even the
British sell gas by the litre.
Click to expand...

Is there some subtle joke in this ludicrous statement?
 
Canuck57 said:
Maybe Hadron never worked on a well run, smooth, reliable, well performing
large scale software development project that was also on budget and on
time. Many have not had this experience.
Click to expand...


And here we see the thread twist.

Please go back and reread what is being discussed.
 
Canuck57 said:
Anyone in engineering and science had better know MKS. Not 100% sure of
this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? Even the
British sell gas by the litre.
Click to expand...

I was fortunate because before high school I learned the British system
(240 pennies in the GBP etc, yards feet and inches) but when I got to
high school they switched to Metric, so using both comes naturally to me.

In the 80s I worked for a US corporation and though we made all kinds of
fasteners (Nuts and bolts) and sold huge quantities of Metric ones all
over Europe the drawing office had to submit things to the US corporate
who insisted on all measurements being in "English" units. There is some
logic to this, high precision gauges are often very costly, so to draw
and measure in the one standard avoids a lot of expense.

So I guess I have stayed in practice with both.
 
Hadron said:
I was referring to the MS Windows programming methodologies comment. The
"less disciplined" bit is crap too. Most projects are so damn
disciplined these days they have certificates coming out of their cracks
but very little SW. OSS is a different kettle of fish - almost zero
discipline and "yet another copycat program" every other day.
Click to expand...

A good process as squat to do with "certificates". In fact the best people
I know in software engineering have degrees/diploma but no certifications,
they are viewed as a wasted effort in advanced levels of software
engineering. Certs are for those that are new, need to show they have a
minimum competency level. Any meaningful certifications are the ones for
the processes and the verification that they are being followed buy the lab.

I was referring to the process of good software design. Requirements,
business cases, documentation, cost analysis, risk, evolution of processes
in a full SQA model.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_Quality_Assurance

How many Microsoft shops have a working SQA modeled process? Many don't
even have a QA position, and if they do they are under funded and under
staffed often without written test plans. How many even have centrally
managed and monitored document/source code control? Source Safe, LOL.
Coding is often ad-hoc and not peer reviewed. Lets not get into the lack of
design documentation, absence of solid planning, requirements and risk
analysis. How many Microsoft projects are on time? Vista anyone?

If you are writing command and control code for something like a nuclear
warship, it isn't like your average I/T shop, or I hope not. Lets whip out
some .NET and some XML because it is whey cool does not float, but might get
you fired. Coding in a well designed and managed project is really just a
short mechanical exercise near the middle-end of the project cycle. On
time, on budget and delivers exactly what is required.
 
Canuck57 said:
A good process as squat to do with "certificates". In fact the best
people
Click to expand...

You, again, misunderstand. I was referring to certificates for successful
phase completion in an overly engineered development process. Think ISO
and all the bollox that entails.
I know in software engineering have degrees/diploma but no certifications,
they are viewed as a wasted effort in advanced levels of software
engineering. Certs are for those that are new, need to show they have a
minimum competency level. Any meaningful certifications are the ones for
the processes and the verification that they are being followed buy the lab.
Click to expand...

I agree. Certification for things like "Word user" tends to be
laughable.
 
dennis@home said:
Clustering doesn't help with application software faults.
Its a common mistake people make, like thinking RAID is a substitute for
backups.



Any application software failing during combat could be a problem.
That is why they like mature software on military systems.
Click to expand...

But this is my point. But maybe not clear.

Why use a complex, hard to review and less stable OS than say pSOS or
vxWorks or even a skinny down version of RTOS like Linux? Why use a complex
high maintenance insecure OS like NT? Seems kind of stupid as simplicity
also has value in reliably, real time response and maintenance. If for
nothing else, less to go wrong.

The need and use of hard drives also bothers me. Get a minor hit vibrating
through the hull and the heads crash...

Agree with clustering, that is primarily for hardware faults. But it would
be nice to know a war ship with nukes has more than one frail way of command
and control.

Hey Scotty, come up and replace this NT DLL or hard drive so we can launch
these damn things...whew...scary thought with a SU 30 or SU 47 coming at
you.
 
Back
Top