Subject: "Shrinkwrap" vs. In-House Software

From: Shlomi Fish <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 15:45:22 +0300 (IDT)

Muli's and Chen's comments illustrate the big difference between
Shrinkwrap (i.e: marketplace) software and Internal one. (as was put
forth in Joel Spolsky's "Five Worlds"). Shrinkwrap plays by completely
different rules: it has to be easy to install, compile out the box, has as
few bugs as possible, meet the users' expectations perfectly, and has all
the features a user can possibly want.

An internal use software fills a niche, but that's it. It could have a lot
of issues, hideous dialogs, and rely on a thousand different programs
being present on the installed computer. It requires much less control and
discpiline.

Open-Source and Redmond software both belong as Shrinkwrap. Mercury's
in-house SCM is internal software. Making it shrinkwrap would take a lot
of effort, which is often not worthwhile. I.e: Mercury would rather say:
use BitKeeper/Aegis/Arch/Subversion and leave us alone.

I can testify that my autoconf scripts and the script I wrote to prepare a
Freecell Solver distro under Win32 qualify as internal software. The fact
that Freecell Solver is shrinkwrap caused me to exert a lot of effort in
making it "just right" for users who needed it. From autoconfisication to
RPM Specing to putting it in the Debian Pool, to adding a lot of redundant
features that were considered "standard" among Freecell enthusiasts who
were used to Microsoft Freecell. (which, IMO, is positively broken)

Putting Internal Software into the wild many time results as
Consultingware: a software that requires so many consultants and
contractors to install properly and show you how to run it, that it seems
it does nothing except that.

The choice of whether to release an in-house software as shrinkwrap
cannot be taken lightly, and cannot be said "yes" to on the sport.
Open-Source idealists are abundant, but even a Slashdot GPL kiddie will
start thinking differently about the development life-cycle of shrinkwrap
once his pet project become useful to a steady group of dedicated users.
And if he's "homesteading the noosphere" (to quote ESR) - then his
experience would be twice or three times fold.

There were many times I downloaded a piece of software I heard of and
tried it out and said: whow! This thing kicks ass! Examples are: valgrind,
WebMetaLanguage, Haskell (which is pretty useless for everyday work),
Perl/Gtk, Perl/Tk, GImageView and KDE, XMMS. But most of the software
you'll see in Freshmeat or on SourceForge is dead on arrival. Good
intentions are common. Discipline and Effort are much less so.
Furthermore, releasing as open-source is one thing; doing a full-fledge
Cathedral style is another.

If you really like a piece of software, send the author a thank you
letter. He'll very much appreciate noticing that his effort has made
someone at least a little happier.

Regards,

	Shlomi Fish

BTW, I should add that I believe Freecell Solver was a place where the
noosphere had been homesteaded. BTW, Freecell Solver is an excellent ice
braker. "You know I wrote a program that solves Freecell boards?" "Really?
Wow! How did you do that." It's something every random guy (and especially
chicks) can understand.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish        [email-masked]
Home Page:         http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
Home E-mail:       [email-masked]

"Let's suppose you have a table with 2^n cups..."
"Wait a second - is n a natural number?"

---

From: Gilad Ben-Yossef <[email-masked]>
Date: 19 Sep 2002 15:52:26 +0300

On Thu, 2002-09-19 at 15:45, Shlomi Fish wrote:

> Shrinkwrap plays by completely

How did you get THAT?

Easy to install is fine. But compile out of the box? shrinkware comes in
binary (even you do get the source). 

It can have many many bugs and often do (Windows, anyone?) but needs to
be usuable to some sxtent. 

'Meet the user expectation prefectly' is almost by definition something
that shrinkware can't and wont do - it just has to be 'good enough'. 

'Have all the fatures that the user can possibly want' is meaningless -
it doesn't happen in any software. Most often it has more feature then
the user ever wants but not the one he *needs*.

Gilad.

-- 
Gilad Ben-Yossef <[email-masked]>
http://benyossef.com

"Too many journalists think that C4I really stands for Inteligence,
 Communication, Control, Computers and Consiparcy."

---

From: Shlomi Fish <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 16:12:46 +0300 (IDT)

> binary (even you do get the source).

You are right. OSS Shrinkwrap should compile out of the box everywhere.
Sourceless one needs to be installed and run everywhere.

> be usuable to some sxtent.

Naturally. However, a developer should make sure he eliminates all the
bugs one by one. There are some rare cases where eliminating a bug will be
more costly than keeping it and adding new feaures. (Spolsky gives as an
example an obscure crash of a Window app on OS/2)

> that shrinkware can't and wont do - it just has to be 'good enough'.

It depends. If I'm used to Win98 as a desktop then KDE has to resemble it
as much as it can if it wishes me to migrate. Now I think KDE is superior
to Windows and so if Microsoft wants me back, they'll have to behave more
like KDE.

Of course, sometimes I encountered a completely innovative way of doing
things and was hooked by its power. I switched from the Turbo C++ debugger
to gdb, and never looked back.

> the user ever wants but not the one he *needs*.

Ahhhh...

I actually found a software package that has everything I need and I could
tweak it exactly the way I wanted it to behave: GImageView. Of course,
some users may say: hey, but this is missing. As for Freecell Solver, the
only thing I've heard missing from it is compatibility to MS Freecell.
FCS has many features that can be thought of as redundant, but I actually
found most of them useful myself.

You can usually fulfill the need of 99% of the users out there. But that
would mean giving most of them the feeling that the software has a lot of
redundant features. Check:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000020.html

Regards,

	Shlomi Fish

> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email-masked]
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

---

From: Orna Agmon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 18:38:20 +0300 (IDT)

> Wow! How did you do that." It's something every random guy (and especially

Do you really think that women are the equivalent of "lowest common 
ground"?

-- 
Orna.   |  http://tx.technion.ac.il/~agmon

The trouble with a kitten is that
Eventually, it becomes a cat.             --Ogden Nash

---

From: Shlomi Fish <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 19:01:33 +0300 (IDT)

> Do you really think that women are the equivalent of "lowest common

Orna, that's not what my meant. I'm just more interested in impressing
girls than I do in impressing fellow Linux gurus. Most girls and guys out
there don't know too much about Linux, its internals, the Internet, and
various protocols involved and all the other technobable. But everyone
(well almost) knows about Freecell.

I might be straight (which is also doubtedly not a good thing) but I'm not
sexist. Honestly.

---

From: "Nadav Har'El" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 19:32:17 +0300

> (well almost) knows about Freecell.

Would you believe that I never heard of freecell before you told me
about it?

I know about Solitare (back from the Windows 3.1 days), but never heard
of the variant you call "freecell".

-- 
Nadav Har'El                        |    Thursday, Sep 19 2002, 14 Tishri 5763
[email-masked]             |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Tact: The ability to describe others as
http://nadav.harel.org.il           |they see themselves. - Abraham Lincoln

---

From: Tzafrir Cohen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 20:20:11 +0300 (IDT)

> > (well almost) knows about Freecell.

Every windows (>=95) user, that is

> of the variant you call "freecell".

Which means that you are a Windows Illiterate.

I have a feeling you don't really miss it.

-- 
Tzafrir Cohen
mailto:[email-masked]
http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir

---

From: "Nadav Har'El" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 00:46:32 +0300

> I have a feeling you don't really miss it.

That's not exactly true... Until two years ago, I was using Windows 95, 98
and NT quite frequently, and people were actually coming to me for solving
their Windows problems ;) But I always prefered Unix variants, and didn't
spend too much time exploring the wonderful world of built-in games in
Windows. I also never played mine-sweeper before I installed one on my Palm
Pilot [1].

For some reason, I suspect that I'm not the person in the world who never
played this game... I would bet that a majority of the so-called chicks (as
well as a majority of the guys) have never laid eyes on this game.

[1] I also installed Solitaire, which I remembered fondly from Windows 3.1,
on my Palm Pilot. That was a mistake: I soon got addicted to playing it,
which wastes a lot of my time and wears down my Palm's touch-screen...
Anybody know of a solitairoholics anonymous group in the Haifa area? :)

-- 
Nadav Har'El                        |      Friday, Sep 20 2002, 14 Tishri 5763
[email-masked]             |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Why aren't fishmongers generous? Their
http://nadav.harel.org.il           |business makes them selfish.

---

From: Sagi Bashari <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 00:58:39 +0200

>Windows. I also never played mine-sweeper before I installed one on my Palm
And you're not the only one. I've been using all versions of windows 
since 3.11 and have never played freecell. I did play solitaire though, 
years ago.

I still don't get the idea of using a computer program to solve a game, 
except showing that it's possible.

Sagi

---

From: Shlomi Fish <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 07:07:50 +0300 (IDT)

> Anybody know of a solitairoholics anonymous group in the Haifa area? :)

I'll start one with you. I'm addicted to Freecell and to Simple Simon,
both are present in the excellent PySol.

Of course a typical pick up line would be something like:

1. Do you know this "Freecell" game in Windows?
2. Possible responses - is no - I only know solitaira then I go to never
mind.
3. Well I written (and worked on for quite a while) on a program that
solves it automatically.

Etc. Etc.

Regards,

	Shlomi Fish

---

From: Alexander Maryanovsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 21:17:28 +0200

>1. Do you know this "Freecell" game in Windows?

*That* is a pickup line? What happened to "Hi, I'm Shlomi, what's your name?"
I doubt you'll pick up many girls your way. On the other hand, the ones you 
will are keepers :-)

Sasha.

At 07:07 20.09.2002 +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2002, Tzafrir Cohen wrote about "Re: [hackers-il] Re: 
> ice- breaker [was: Re: "Shrinkwrap" vs. In-House Software]":

---

From: Oleg Goldshmidt <[email-masked]>
Date: 20 Sep 2002 09:38:01 +0300

"Nadav Har'El" <[email-masked]> writes:

> I also never played mine-sweeper before I installed one on my Palm
> Pilot [1].

I never even learned the rules of Solitaire until an employer of mine
gave me an iPAQ. I got bored after about 3 minutes, and I was waiting
for my plane at Heathrow at the time. I still don't know what Freecell
is. I gather it is a game, but what is the point of a game if a
machine can "solve" it (I guess that's what Shlomi's s/w does).

;-)

-- 
Oleg Goldshmidt | [email-masked] 
=================================================================
"... Of theoretical physics and programming, programming embodied 
the greater intellectual challenge." [E.W.Dijkstra, 1930 - 2002.]

---

From: Oleg Goldshmidt <[email-masked]>
Date: 20 Sep 2002 10:00:07 +0300

> 3. Well I written (and worked on for quite a while) on a program that

I am glad it works for Shlomi. I also hope the other party asks to
explain the algorithms.

Will one of the chicks[1], broads, gals (a.k.a. beautiful ladies) on
this list explain to me[2] why this would work as a pick-up line? I
never wrote a freecell solver, so I am afraid to use it lest I am
exposed as a fraud quickly. Will "I know a guy who wrote a freecell
solver" be effective? Will "I used to be Russia's checkers champion
and I did not use a computer for that" be helpful?

[1] GeekChicks: http://www.geekchicks.com/
    LinuxChix:  http://linuxchix.org/

[2] Preferably in a candid, openminded, personal email,
    of course. Alternatively, please attach a photo in any non-M$
    format and the discussion may be deferred till dinner or drinks,
    depending on your GIMP skills (algorithm: for the same photo, if
    you have no GIMP skills dinner is likelier). [A big ;-) goes here
    in case someone thinks I mixed up mailing lists.]

This grew entirely off-topic, I am afraid. What's more, discussion of
pick-up techniques can conceivably be offensive to the female part of
the audience, so can we drop it, at least till the next round of beers
among us guys?

---

From: Shlomi Fish <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 19:58:59 +0300 (IDT)

Notice that I only used the "Do you know the game Freecell for Windows?",
"Yes.", "Well, I wrote a computerized solver for it?" mostly on Technion
crowd. I have no idea how much it would work on a girl or a man that is
not very technologically inclined.

My point was that a solver for Freecell is something that everybody can
easily understand. Many projects out there require quite in-depth
knowledge in the way UNIX, Linux, TCP/IP or whatever works. But everybody
may know about Freecell and understand what a Freecell solver may do.

I'm terribly sorry if I offended anyone by using the "chick" word. I
should have used "girl" instead.

Sincerily yours,

	Shlomi Fish

---

From: "Nadav Har'El" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 00:50:51 +0300

> should have used "girl" instead.

While using the word "chick" was not the most politically-correct thing
you could have done, there are certain people here that need to remember
that they should not take personal offense by everything someone writes.
These people should especially be careful of taking offense by someone
writing in a language other than his or her first language, or when the
reader himself or herself speaks that language as a second language.

For examples why, take a look at the well known joke:
	http://www.thehumorarchives.com/humor/0000164.html
A sign in a Japanese hotel said "You are invited to take advantage of the
chambermaid". As the saying says, never attribute to malice what can be
explained by stupidity.

Incidentally, I was watching some British movie on TV this evening, and
one of the things I like about British movies is paying attention to their
language, diction and slang. British slang, or even language that you can
find in dictionaries, is sometimes quite different from the American one
that I am much more accustomed to. For example, the noun "fag" means
completely different things to an American and a Brit (check out m-w.com,
definition 3 is the British one, definition 4 is the American). One of
words that the Brits in that movie seemed to use while Americans never,
is using the word "bird" for a girl (take a look in m-w.com if you don't
believe me). If bird means woman, it's obvious why chick could mean a young
woman. m-w.com lists "chick" as slang, and indeed it is (as far as I can
remember, it is mostly American slang). It is considered a "low" word,
which you would say to your male buddies, not something you'd write on
paper; Nevertheless, using this word is no reason for crucifixion.

And to girls that are offended by the slang "chick", well, the British
slang "bloke", for a man, doesn't sound that much better :) The word
"hunk" describing a good-looking man doesn't sound that respectful either.

By the way, looking in google with a few words I wrote above, I found some
page trying to summarize the differences in slang between four different
English-speaking countries: http://us2uk.tripod.com/slang.htm
Some of the slangs there are wrong (or "euphemized"), however. Anyway,
to anyone offended by the word "chick" for a girl, see what you think about
the south-african alternative listed, "cherry". Check out m-w.com's
definition 3b of cherry if you don't know what cherry really refers to...

Cheerio,
	Nadav.

-- 
Nadav Har'El                        |      Sunday, Sep 22 2002, 16 Tishri 5763
[email-masked]             |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Microchips: what's left at the bottom of
http://nadav.harel.org.il           |the bag when it reaches you.

---

From: Shlomi Fish <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 08:55:54 +0300 (IDT)

> reader himself or herself speaks that language as a second language.

For my own accusation, I can say I knew the word chick was a bit
derogatory, and used it deliberately. But it was a bad idea in the first
place.

> "hunk" describing a good-looking man doesn't sound that respectful either.

Actually, according to m-w, hunk means a well-built man who is usually
good-looking. But I think it now applies to men of lesser physique who are
just dashing.

This make me wonder: does anybody of you considers himself good-looking? I
think I'm moderately good looking but not much. I wonder if the most
beautiful women I know (i.e Terry Farrel, Veronica Blume, Valeria Golino,
Shania Twain, to name some of the international ones) look at themselves
in the mirror and say "Man, I'm looking good!". It's a bit narcistic if
you ask me.

Regards,

	Shlomi Fish

---

From: Alexander Maryanovsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 23:06:50 +0200

>in the mirror and say "Man, I'm looking good!". It's a bit narcistic if

I consider myself moderately good looking.
 From my (not very big) experience, there are no women who feel completely 
happy about their bodies. The most beautiful girls will still find 
something wrong about themselves. On the other hand, I know a few girls who 
realize they're not extremely attractive, but don't care about it, which 
makes them that much more attractive.

Alexander Maryanovsky.

---

From: "Nadav Har'El" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 14:42:58 +0300

This is getting more and more off-topic... Maybe we should open a new
list, hackers-il-male-chauvinist-lingo? :) Just kidding!

> good-looking. But I think it now applies to men of lesser physique who are

You are right, the word "hunk" usually describes a guy with a good-looking
muscular body, not necessarily a good-looking face (though preferably that
should be the case too).

> in the mirror and say "Man, I'm looking good!". It's a bit narcistic if

On an optimistic day, I'll go to the mirror and say, "Man, I'm average
looking!" :)

This question can be asked about many attributes, not just good looks. For
example, once in a while someone decides to annoy me by asking a question
like "are you a genious"? To that I usually reply "no, I don't consider
myself one", and after that an argument start, the other person trying to
convince me that I am, and I try to explain why I think I am not.

Good looks, smarts, weight, height and most other human attributes are
continuous, meaning that it's not easy to say where exactly on the scale
of good looks etc. you are, or to define how good do you have to look before
you can actually call yourself "beautiful". A pretty girl might not admit
to being beautiful but will more easily admit to being "prettier than
average, but still there are many girls more prettier than me all around me".
Similarly, I don't mind admitting being "smarter than average" (I have
various scores, grades, and so on to back that claim up) but I wouldn't
admit to being a genious.

It's also hard, many times, to seperate your intrinsic attributes from
external influences; For example a beautiful girl might say "I'm not
beautiful, I'm just good with make-up and go to an expensive hair stylist";
An educated person might say "I'm not a genious, I just had the good fortunes
of attending a good school and have read good books".

Mental illnesses which completely distort your ability to estimate your
location in these continuous scales can be very dangerous. Girls (usually)
with Anorexia know they are thin, but (because of their mental illness) do
not admit that it is thin enough, and to the brink of death believe that
they should be slightly thinner to be called "thin enough".

If you want to run a survey on how good-looking people think they are,
or at least how they try to represent themeselves to the outside world,
take a look at any dating site. You might be surprised, most girls (I
didn't check guys, for understandable reasons ;)) mark themselves as "good
looking". It doesn't necessarily mean that is what they think about
themselves, but it's what they pretend to be to the rest of the world.

-- 
Nadav Har'El                        |      Sunday, Sep 22 2002, 16 Tishri 5763
[email-masked]             |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Linux is just like a wigwam: no Windows,
http://nadav.harel.org.il           |no Gates and an Apache inside.

---

From: Oleg Goldshmidt <[email-masked]>
Date: 22 Sep 2002 19:03:13 +0300

"Nadav Har'El" <[email-masked]> writes:

> you can actually call yourself "beautiful". 

ObHack:

Was it Dirac who observed that there must be an optimal distance from
which a woman looks most attractive? Proof: attractiveness (visual) is
non-negative (that's a generous assumption, but let's take a subset of
women whose attractiveness *is* non-negative) and is a continuous
function of distance, in two limiting cases - zero and infinity - it's
0 because one cannot see anything.

> If you want to run a survey on how good-looking people think they

In the 1920ies a group of prominent scientists, physicists and
biologists (IIRC the well-known physicist max Delbruck and the famous
geneticist Timofeev-Resovsky, both close to Bohr, were among them)
amused themselves by conducting a quasi-scientific survey of female
beauty in Europe. IIRC they gave each woman they pointed out to their
friends as beautiful 4 points, each woman they did *not* point out to
their friends 5 points, each average-looking woman 3 points, etc. They
proceeded then to draw a map of Europe with the distribution plotted
as contour lines. The maximum turned out to be in what later became
Yugoslavia (Dubrovnik?) and also in Czechoslovakia. I don't know what
kinds of bias they introduced into the sample, but these were serious
guys.

> You might be surprised, most girls (I didn't check guys, for
> understandable reasons ;)) mark themselves as "good looking". It
> doesn't necessarily mean that is what they think about themselves,
> but it's what they pretend to be to the rest of the world.

The reasons are quite clear...

---

From: Orna Agmon <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 21:53:33 +0300 (IDT)

> makes them that much more attractive.

a. It would be considered very impolite for a person to say (s)he is 
perfect, would you not think?

b. In the matching arena, almost everybody upgrades their own score, i.e. 
say they look better than they do, because since one assumes this is what 
everybody else does, one also assumes that the person reading the 
description automatically downgrades everybody. So, in order to get your 
apropriate grade in the mind of the reader, you are forced to lie.