<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>windows on Tom Hickerson's Site</title><link>https://tomhickerson.com/en/tags/windows/</link><description>Recent content in windows on Tom Hickerson's Site</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><copyright>Copyright 2023-2026</copyright><lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://tomhickerson.com/en/tags/windows/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>more finger pointing about Vista</title><link>https://tomhickerson.com/en/archives/en/2006/2006-06-15-more-finger-pointing-about-vista/</link><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://tomhickerson.com/en/archives/en/2006/2006-06-15-more-finger-pointing-about-vista/</guid><description>Some of the things I have written about in the past have been about software failure. It should be no surprise then that I am linking to this detailed post about the Windows Vista slippage and the circumstances that the poster claims to have made the &amp;ldquo;largest software project ever&amp;rdquo; becoming &amp;ldquo;also the longest&amp;rdquo;:
They knew months in advance that the schedule would never work. So they told their VP. And he, possibly influenced by one too many instances where engineering re-routes power to the warp core, thus completing the heretofore impossible six-hour task in a mere three, summarily sent the managers back to &amp;ldquo;figure out how to make it work.</description></item></channel></rss>