*afraid it will be removed - as stated - so posting it
Ok let's take a look back at the great mgmt decisions in one Windows test org: Not an important group; just appcompat. (It's not like anyone really cares about appcompat - who cares if customers' 3rd party apps (and especially MS apps)
really don't work that well on this new fustercluck.
In the last 18 months this org:
1) Cut the number of testers (several times) from approx 50 to now much less than a dozen. Of course, many top performers also left MS entirely because of middle mgmt in this org.
2) Hired more PMs
3) Cut the scope of testing (anyone done any real code coverage testing lately?)
4) Cut the number of promotions in the test orgs - nothing like a little 'de-incentivization' to increase 'bad attrition'
5) Dictate that everything can and should be automated. (Ignore that eyeballs catch more in less time...) way to go Darren. Of course, you were probably lied to by your underlings, so it's not entirely your fault. Uhh, yes it is - you made the call.
6) Hire only a small handful of devs to write automation code. Oh, and don't forget to swamp them with added process and have embittered leads review their code...
7) Hire more PMs
8) Outsource all testing to non-accountable and barely trained CSG firms overseas (Ever try to translate/clarify a bug written not by a tester, but by their lead based on notes? )
9) Limit the number of heads the abovementioned overseas firms can use. > Fewer testers, less experienced, with little training, a much (ahem) 'slower' approach to testing.
Results: Client appcompat % hovering at <40% (GASP - INTERNAL INFO... better moderate this one out!!!!)
Here's an anomaly for PM's to 'splain away. If automation is such a great tool, why is it not finding more bugs than a small handful of testers in a lab on the other side of the planet?
In an amazingly fortuitous time frame (say, just before some upper mgmt BOTL really is), a new and more insightful way of looking at the raw numbers will reveal that the appcompat % is actually >75%. No, wait, did I say 75? I meant 85. At RTM it will be 95.6,
or whatever other arbitrary happy-happy number they came up with like last time. In reality, last go-around, the appcompat % was quite high, despite the PM lies, just not as high as they claimed.
What? You're going to dispute the numbers that some lower functionaries spun up through the labyrinthine PM food chain? At each 'filter' point one gets to improve his own rep by making his ownership area look better. What's a few % points between bureaucrats?
While I'm in rant mode, why exactly IS MCE so bad? Didn't anyone test this puppy before kicking it out the door and having another PM party?
A brand new Dell with full OEM installed load and almost nothing works in the expected 'just plug it in Dad and it works'.
Sure is great he has a son who works at MS. Oh, no he doesn't. His son left.
Vista - I wouldn't buy it with someone else's money. Then again What do I know, I've only been testing the dog for the last 2-3 yrs...
not pretty... i know photoshop 3 no longer works...hint ;0
I'm amazed that with all the talent Microsoft has acquired that they are in this boat. One thing I have noticed with the videos here is that they are very limited when it comes to showing off the new graphics. And yes, I have watched them, thanks.
That's because graphics don't video well from a camcorder.
Anyway...if the user turns off the aero glass features, do all apps still end up being rendered as "vectors"? Would that cause backward compatability issues? I'm just curious as to what the bottlenecks really are...the security thing doesn't work for me because
there will always be security issues.
Apps (non-WPF ones at least) aren't rendered as "vectors" either way. When the DWM is enabled (which is required for glass), the window's surface is a texture that is rendered on a 3D surface. When it is disabled, the apps render as they did on previous versions
of Windows. So that probably has less to do with compatibility.
The biggest compatibility problems ("bottlenecks" as you put it) are poorly written apps. This includes those that use undocumented features or data structures (Raymond Chen's blog is chock full of examples), or those that choke under LUA.
Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.