[rescue] ham gear

[Peter Porter]

Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:

> True, but there are plenty of open source packages out there which are
>
>crap as well. I call it "open sores" software.
>
>The bigger problem there though, is just mis-application.
>
>The move to COTS for everything has hurt too, I think, and so has the
>push for "one size fits all" solutions like Java, Windows, or any
>situation where they try to do every job with just one tool.
>
>Initially it was felt this kind of thing would save money.
>
>No COTS software or hardware is completely right for a job as custom as
>what the military needs.  That means they have to spend money
>integrating all this stuff together, and configuring it for the work
>they need.
>
>I believe this costs *MORE* than custom vertical applications in at
>least a significant number of situations, and is very hard to make as
>reliable and well focused as a custom job.
>
I've come to agree with this very much.  COTS software is inevitably 
inadequate, too bulky, *WAY* too expensive (read: Kofax) for the 
features most projects seem to end up using (read: one or two), and in 
my ever so humble opinion... "integrating" software is always a messy, 
lousy proposition.  I'd never want to depend on that for any project I'm 
responsible for.

The real problem, in my experience, is an inability of those in charge 
to manage, make tough decisions, and demand quality from their entire 
team.  Settling for lousy performance and a lousy product is... well... 
lousy.  I thought our country was built on people determined to make the 
most of technology, to push it to new limits, and to work as hard as 
they could.  Not bottom of the barrel, unmotivated bums.  Where's the 
dedication to our work?

I apologize for my ranting, I'll give it a rest now.  (and I agree with 
custom vertical applications, managed per paragraph 2)

-Peter