Journal drinkypoo's Journal: How many old bugs are in OSX? 1
Names changed to protect the relatively innocent... This was in a discussion about a bug filed and ignored, on a thread on a social networking site.
"Ah, that's a shame! I'm sorry you had one bad experience. There are many people that work at apple and it is hard to know how one person may handle a bug versus another. You should still log bugs, even if they seem to go into a black hole. It really does help with the Quality of the product, and I'm 100% positive every bug is at least looked at and some action is taken on (even if it is to just keep it in a "bit bucket" of things to possibly fix). I have bugs assigned to me from NeXt in the late 1990's. Some of which I have recently fixed. My name is X. I work on Y. Log a bug on Z and it will come to my group."
Or, you know, you could just use some operating system with some kind of openness and accountability and file bugs that will be addressed. Every significant bug I have ever filed against any Ubuntu package has had some kind of activity, acknowledgement, and usually a fix (or marked as a duplicate, of course... and eventually, a fix.)
How many antique bugs known since the NeXTStep days are still in OSX, just getting forwarded through multiple revisions while Apple adds new features?
I don't such an OS exists. (Score:2)
When you have the core developers of major linux distributions refusing to fix a bug despite being called out publicly by Linus Torvalds[1]it's hard to feel like switching to Linux would be any better. Especially when one considers that the objectively best Linux distribution (by number of users) for desktop applications is Ubuntu and they break shit just to break shit every release.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638477 [redhat.com]