No, I'm with you all the way. I misread your post (too early in the morning)......
> From: Billy Brown[SMTP:email@example.com]
> Reply To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Sent: 08 July 1999 23:11
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: RE: Human minds on Windows(?)
> Rob Harris Cen-IT wrote:
> > LOC stands for Lines Of Code. Not much of a measure of "quality".
> Defects per LOC is the best metric anyone has ever come up with for
> measuring the quality of actual program code, which is what we were
> about. User-percieved quality, as in "I really like this program", is a
> completely different thing. You can have excellent code and still turn
> a poor product if your overall program design (and especially user
> design) are bad. This is what Microsoft tends to do.
> On a tangential note, you seem to think that large programs are inherently
> bad in some sense. Why? A high-quality program is one that does the
> I want it to do in a simple and cost effective manner. As long as you
> that, who cares if the program is 5 KB or 5 MB? Program size only becomes
> important if the software is so big that it actually affects its
> performance, or takes up a meaningfull fraction of my hard drive, or in
> other way limits my ability to use it.
> Billy Brown, MCSE+I
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.