|
-
October 2nd, 2005, 04:35 AM
#41
Linus Torvalds.... Tim Patterson.
Only about 2% of the current Linux kernel is written by Torvalds himself.
-wikipedia
Tim Paterson (born 1956 or 1957) is an American computer programmer, best known as the original author of the popular MS-DOS operating system.
QDOS was approximately 4,000 lines of 8086 assembly code
source:www.answers.com/topic/tim-paterson
Although tim patterson is an impressive programmer, you cannot compare 1 person creating 4,000 lines of code for MS-DOS to 1 person creating windows XP which is now well over 50 million lines of code... And I have heard that Windows Vista is estimated to exceed over a billion lines of code...
Lets see Tim Patterson or Linus Torvalds create that...  .
-
October 2nd, 2005, 12:09 PM
#42
And I have heard that Windows Vista is estimated to exceed over a billion lines of code...
Lets see Tim Patterson or Linus Torvalds create that... .
Anyone can create a broken OS using 10 lines, 20 lines or 100,000,000 lines of code. Even Gore.
Vista is broken as admitted by Microsoft recently. The amount of people and lines of code involved are irrelivant. I'm interested in the end product which in the case of MS is a steaming pile of poop. I'll take QDOS over vista. At least I know it works.
Source:
http://tinyurl.com/7undd
Our scars have the power to remind us that our past was real. -- Hannibal Lecter.
Talent is God given. Be humble. Fame is man-given. Be grateful. Conceit is self-given. Be careful. -- John Wooden
-
October 2nd, 2005, 12:15 PM
#43
You could add a few MB worth of nullspace in a file and say that there is a million lines of code there... that still doesn't mean anything except that most people don't understand how to properly compile alot of C++ programs.
-
October 2nd, 2005, 01:02 PM
#44
Actually if you look at it closely the kernal for Windows is not 1 billion lines it is all the added extras that build up the number of lines of code. Also dont forget Microsoft is proud to have only 1 error in about 1000 lines of code. The whole idea of programming is to be able to write a programme that is as tight and efficent as possiable. basically the smaller the better.
How many bugs will be in those 1000,000,000 lines of code even if they could improve it to 1 bug in 100,000 lines of code?
To give my take on the original question the answer is it will take the time it takes. All depends on what part of computing you are going to specialise in.
\"America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.\"
\"The reason we are so pleased to find other people\'s secrets is that it distracts public attention from our own.\"
Oscar Wilde(1854-1900)
-
October 2nd, 2005, 02:58 PM
#45
Hi
Well if a person is really interested in computers then internet is god for him/her. u can find anything and everything on the internet. Becoming a genius is actually investing time. The more u put in the more u can take benifit out. If u r very serious about computers analyze urself and choose one out of the various fields in computing.
Remember : "I am a jack of all trades and master of none". This statement doesnt apply in the computing world. U cant even count the no. of trades going in computing. Some of these r highly confedential like research technologies for missiles and weapons which r not even known in the world we live in.
  \"The Smilie Wars\" ... just arrived after the great crusades
 .... computers come to the rescue .... ah technology at last has some use.
-
October 3rd, 2005, 01:38 AM
#46
You guys are missing my point  ... Given to the complexity of OS's these day's it is not practical for one person to create a OS that is going to compete with MAC, for example. The time it would take to create Vista with one programmer would be decades, maybe longer. Microsoft doesn't want one person creating Vista, and I'm sure neither of you do either.
-
October 3rd, 2005, 01:46 AM
#47
Actually if Vista was done by one person, it would be better.
More programmers you have, more problems you have.
The Tao of programming points out :
"How long is this going to take if you have 10 people helping? "12 weeks" What if you have 300 people?" "120 years"...
-
October 3rd, 2005, 04:37 AM
#48
Originally posted here by thehorse13
Vista is broken as admitted by Microsoft recently. The amount of people and lines of code involved are irrelivant. I'm interested in the end product which in the case of MS is a steaming pile of poop. I'll take QDOS over vista. At least I know it works.
Vista is broken as admitted by Microsoft recently. - Jame Gumb
I want a some B3 in my life, I don't care if granny can use the system or not.
-
October 3rd, 2005, 07:30 PM
#49
I realize that 1 person creating vista would be better long term, but it is not practical...
CHRIST! How is there even an argument about this!!...??
-
October 3rd, 2005, 09:52 PM
#50
An operating system created by a single person would be terrible. The best operating systems are created in the context of a strict design and development process. In this context more people means both more money and more difficult to manage, but development would be faster with the same quality of work as a smaller team in using the same process . The design and development would be better than a small team of "geniuses" using an inferior process.
cheers,
catch
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Reply With Quote
