echristley(at)nc.rr.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:48 am Post subject: AeroElectric-List Digest: 26 Msgs - 06/24/06 |
 |
|
AeroElectric-List Digest Server wrote:
| Quote: | The AI NEVER stabilizes there is a slow tumble until I see either nothing but
sky or ground. NEVER STABILIZING!
Has anyone ever run across this problem and if so what was the cause and cure?
It has been suggested that I perform two (2) operations:
1 - Upgrade the Software from Ver 2.21 to Ver 2.64
2 - Hook up the keyboard and do a Warm System reboot from the keyboard
What are your thoughts? Does this sound like a cure? Of course the software
upgrade is required and will be done.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
I work in the software industry as a Quality Assurance Engineer, ie. I
|
test software. I've written a lot of software. I've met a lot of
software engineers. I've worked worked for several software companies.
There is a wide range of attitudes when it comes to software.
At one end of the spectrum is the companies/engineers that treat
software and the requisite hardware as an appliance. The software is
tied intimately to the hardware, and a breakage in one signifies a
breakage in the other. A breakage in either signifies a breakage in the
organization. Code is meticulously maintained, and every last detail of
the software/hardware combination is tested as much as humanly possible
before shipping to the customer. The engineers tend to be very
experienced and 'slow moving'. The code is not expected to break when
delivered to QA. The best example I have personal experience with is
IBM's mainframe networking division.
The other end of the spectrum is what I like to call "The Microsoft
Generation". Code is whipped out using long tool chains built on top of
libraries written by someone else. I meet lots of these engineers
building database frontends to generate reports to management. The
criteria for these engineers is that they generate a disposable app
quickly and move on to the next project. They are conditioned to value
a new glitzy widget over solid engineering. Code unit test is an
afterthought at best, and if it does happen it consist of being able to
generate a report on a couple sets of data at most. These guys deliver
stuff to QA with the idea that the test team will tell them what is
wrong with the code. I call it the Microsoft Generation, because that
company has be the forerunner in preaching that hiring competent,
seasoned engineers is uneccessary with their software. Software is
complex and should be expected to break, they preach, but their tool set
will enable a cheap college grad that will work around the clock for
Coke and pizza to spit out polished applications to run the enterprise.
Widget, "new features" and just more eye-candy can be added ad nauseum,
quickly and easily.
The Microsoft Generation is OK for generating reports to management.
I'll even abide letting them build a video game or two. But I want real
engineers writing any software that I will be letting my butt ride on.
I talked to Blue Mountain and Dynon at Sun-n-Fun. The question I had in
mind was, "If I were an QA engineer at this company, what would the
development team deliver to me for testing?" The Dynon unit booted
quickly and showed a simple display. I got the "feel" that the software
was written for the hardware, and the hardware was designed for the
software. The BMA unit seemed to take for ever to boot up, complete
with splash screen to keep the user occupied reading copyright
information while it did a digital dance behind the scenes. (BTW, a
"splash screen" is a red flag that someone from the Microsoft Generation
is behind the scenes. How is it helpful, except to show more
eye-candy? And copyright? What am I going to do, run the stuff on my
PC?) I got the distinct feeling that BMA engineers would expect me to
tell them what was wrong with it, while the Dynon folks would only
expect me to verify that it works as they designed it.
My thoughts? The fact that the BMA is designed for "quick upgrades" is
a glaring red flag. The thing is a limited function device. It should
work out of the box. The in-field "quick upgrade" tells me that BMA is
using you as a beta tester. The fact that it doesn't work out of the
box tells me that either the hardware or software is broken. Being that
this is the real world, I can accept hardware being broken. Things
break in shipping...not every IC is tested off the assembly line..etc.
But the fact that a 'software fix' is available gives me the thought
that the development organization needs a fix.
--
,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org |
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
