The Old Joel on Software Forum: Part 4 (of 5)

business ethics and bugs

Ted reviewed Joels speech, I read:

"Bugs are bad. Fixing bugs is good. So, fix your bugs."
Then he (Joel) brought up the next slide: WRONG.
Fixing bugs cost money. So, fix the bugs that are worth it.

From a business point of view this might be
a wise decision.

But I do not read anything about the customer
who bought the product.
Is he asked if the problem is worth solving?

"Yes I know you have a problem and you
paid for my software but guess what:
I only count profit and loss so
read the disclaimer."

How to get people passionate in hating
you.
So be a man, lose 20 K and fix Mr.Unknowns problem
with his 486 who does not buy that much software anyway
and make this world a better place. Yes, I like drama.

kind regards
John Fisher

John Fisher
Friday, February 20, 2004

Fair enough. I guess we'll be findin' 'n' fixin' all of our bugs before we release our software.

Do you want it to run on Windows 2.0 as well?

AJS
Friday, February 20, 2004

IMHO you missed the point. Any reasonable estimate of the cost of fixing must account for user reaction. If many users with stop buying/upgrading that's a part of the cost equation.

sgf
Friday, February 20, 2004

Well.. bugs that annoy users would make sense to fix from a business perspective too?

Eric Debois
Friday, February 20, 2004

You can look at it 2 ways; either the squeaky wheel gets the grease, or chase the money.

1 line summary of JOS article - If enough people complain, or they have influence / cash, then fix the bug.

Bit harsh, but that's business life. Inf the case of open source, the developers tell you fix the damn bug yourself, and send them the patch.

AJS
Friday, February 20, 2004