[qwertyuiop924]

Of course. My post was less about how QNX's lack of popularity subverts your point (it doesn't), and more about setting up that punchline.

There's quite a bit of reality in the article, but not quite enough to depress me. Maybe you've seen more of this sort of thing than I have.

[nickpsecurity]

Ahh gotcha. Far as other thing, have you seen the Web and enterprise BS getting lots of adoption since big names tried them out? And the drift to incomprehensible frameworks with huge dependencies that one can barely maintain with similar security problems and a tiny fraction of efficiency of C++? And now more of them as SaaS? Just thinking there's lots of that bullshit in the article going on in real life. It's that or legacy SAP, Oracle, COBOL, MFC BS. Competing BS exists but sanity gets rarer and rarer.

[digi_owl]

Outsourcing was done with great care by a few big name corporations. And after their apparent success every two bit public traded company went on a "me too!" outsourcing rush to try to goose their share value.

[nickpsecurity]

I'm not aware of its early history. Which were the ones that pulled it off first?

[qwertyuiop924]

Oooh. That. I get a miss on a lot of it, because I'm not in industry, and I avoid Java (the natural focal point of incomprehensible frameworks), and frameworks in general.

On a daily basis, the worst I have to deal with is SystemD, which is creatively incompotent and best, and downright insane at worst. But it's got a pretty face, and the draw of easy-to-understand unit files (over, say, SVinit), so people don't realize the depths of the madness that lies beneath.