X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-PolluStop: No license found, only first 5 messages were scanned Return-Path: Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.192.81] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.1) with ESMTP id 1207222 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:25:15 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=204.127.192.81; envelope-from=hoursaway1@comcast.net Received: from rmailcenter73.comcast.net (rmailcenter73.comcast.net?[204.127.197.155](misconfigured sender)) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id <20060626232424m1100b0p5ve>; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:24:29 +0000 Received: from [24.11.214.194] by rmailcenter73.comcast.net; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:24:23 +0000 From: hoursaway1@comcast.net To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] [Fwd: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Software attitudes] Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:24:23 +0000 Message-Id: <062620062324.24450.44A06CA70005D38800005F822207300793CE970E990E9C9D9A0108@comcast.net> X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Apr 11 2006) X-Authenticated-Sender: aG91cnNhd2F5MUBjb21jYXN0Lm5ldA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_24450_1151364263_0" --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_24450_1151364263_0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sounds like a plug for Dynon,, makes me feel good; D100 RV6A Rotary, David. (upgraded my panel before flying the aircraft) -------------- Original message -------------- From: Ernest Christley > Forwarded by popular demand (Ed'd popular and he demanded it 8*) > {Several typos corrected} > > -------- Original Message -------- > > Applaud! Applaud! Great insight, Ernest. Should post this on the Rotary > list just for our general info. > > Ed > > Ed Anderson > Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered > Matthews, NC > eanderson@carolina.rr.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ernest Christley" > To: > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 10:44 AM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 26 Msgs - 06/24/06 > > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley > > > > > > AeroElectric-List Digest Server wrote: > > > >>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 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 been 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 works around the clock for Coke and pizza to > > spit out polished applications to run the enterprise. Widgets, "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 forever 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 | > > > > > > > -- > ,|"|"|, Ernest Christley | > ----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder | > o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org | > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_24450_1151364263_0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sounds like a plug for Dynon,,  makes me feel good;  D100  RV6A Rotary, David. (upgraded my panel before flying the aircraft)
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>

> Forwarded by popular demand (Ed'd popular and he demanded it 8*)
> {Several typos corrected}
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>
> Applaud! Applaud! Great insight, Ernest. Should post this on the Rotary
> list just for our general info.
>
> Ed
>
> Ed Anderson
> Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
> Matthews, NC
> eanderson@carolina.rr.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ernest Christley"
> To:
> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 10:44 AM
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 26 Msgs - 06/24/06
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christle y
> >
> >
> > AeroElectric-List Digest Server wrote:
> >
> >>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 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 bee n 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 works around the clock for Coke and pizza to
> > spit out polished applications to run the enterprise. Widgets, "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 forever 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 d esigned 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 |
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
> ----===<{{(o Qo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
> o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org |
>
> --
> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
--NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_24450_1151364263_0--