[Interest] the path forward - that 7 year thing - was, , willy-nilly

Roland Hughes roland at logikalsolutions.com
Thu Apr 1 14:47:23 CEST 2021

On 4/1/21 6:48 AM, Volker Hilsheimer wrote:
> But why should the Qt Project have to care? The Qt Project doesn’t sell into the medical or industrial automation market.
That's the market that really made Qt. Nokia sure as Hell didn't. The 
market was pursued.
> If a medical device manufacturer makes a technology decision and choses Qt based on the policies of Qt "the Open Source” Project, then I’ll trust that they know what they are doing. And if they are not happy with how Qt “the Open Source” Project operates, then I’m sure they’ll check what The Qt Company can provide as a commercial service that fits their needs.
> Perhaps that happens frequently already. That would explain the recent development of the Qt Company stock price...

What I'm seeing as a traveling consultant dealing with many medical 
device manufacturers is wholesale abandonment.

As everybody has learned during the Trump years, stock prices have no 
correlation with reality as long as the government is handing near zero 
dollar interest money to the brokerage firms and banks. Right now it is 
the world's largest Pump & Dump market.

You forget that I did two tours of duty writing trading floor systems 
for a major stock exchange.

> Volker
> PS: Roland, I was looking at your https://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com/agile_book.html page, and judging by this sentence, I think your review process is broken. You should probably ask for your money back from your professional editors, or something… :P
> "The author of this title has spent over 30 years in IT working on multi-country corporate applications before there was an Interent, to stock exchange trading floor systems, desktop applications, and even multiple medical devices."
The book was professionally edited. I put the page together with far 
less thought than I put into a post on here. You think it is a run-on 
sentence, so what? The book still sells and I've done very little 
marketing. Other than the occasional mention when answering a question 
for free, none really.

When the justification for letting 12 year old bugs exist in the bug 
database is:

that the code was too complex or that fixing the old bug would create 
new bugs

The code had just as much review before check-in as the page that you 
looked at.

Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions


More information about the Interest mailing list