services.msc is the Microsoft Management Console snap-in for controlling the service control manager. It's really not the thing that's similar to systemd. I think the service control manager (SCM) itself is similar, but it also has an API for control and a couple command line interfaces (dos and powershell). I've actually worked on a project on FreeBSD (closed source) where the concept of an SCM type application always came up. In theory it could have provided a nice consistent interface to our "services" to do things like stop, start, query status, logging, etc. All the boiler plate stuff then looks the same from the outside, instead of being more adhoc. I guess with initd and all the shell scripts, you get a few logging utilities and then shell error codes. Other than that, it's pretty much open season.
Anyone who has written a service for windows knows a few things. First, you always need a way to run it as a normal windows console app or debugging it is a royal pain. Second, you better write it so that it shuts down properly or you'll be getting tons of questions about warnings and errors in the event log. Installing and un-installing can also be painful. I can't be certain how/why, but automating the installation, upgrade, and removal of the service was sometimes problematic if someone logged in and left the SCM control panel running.
Once you have all the kinks ironed out, it's really nice. Admins can start and stop things, install/run your service as different users both domain or local. They can also do things like restrict access to the network, etc. and it's all familiar to them. It does take some cooperation on the developer's part. It is possible to write a service that totally sucks. By sucks, I mean it's buggy and therefore doesn't play nicely with the SCM. Leaves cruft in the registry, and so on.
I had an opportunity to write code on windows (c++ and c#) for about 5-6 years after working exclusively on Linux, FreeBSD, IRIX, HP-UX, and Solaris for about 10 years. I really liked it a lot. I worked on win2k3 and xp, and then win2k8 and win7. I thought win2k8/win7 were both really nice. I was actually blown away about how good the MS IDE and debugger is. The shell still sort of sucks (powershell). I wish someone would write a 'native' shell for windows that was cool. I'd event settle for a dos prompt you can resize like an xterm.
There is no technical reason they should be so expensive, components wise I mean. But the development and QA processes, and regulatory filings, audits, and all the other crap to make it suitable for medical purposes, make it so. That is why a WII balance board costs peanuts, but a medical device with similar functionality costs 10K. If has to be developed according to FDA regulatiosn, there need to be mandatory QA controls in place, software needs to be developed according to medical use standards, there is a regular FDA audit to deal with, liability, studies and validations, etc.
The WII balance board just needs to work. For a while. Non calibrated, non validated, and if it doesn't do what is expected in some cases, you get to call tech support instead of file a million dollar lawsuit.
In meaning, there is a difference. But in reality there isn't. Medical applicances are subject to a lot of regulatory requirements that you cannot skip. If you have something that was not developed and released according to the applicable rules, it simply does not meet the standards and none in the medical field can use it for medical applications. You may think it is annoying or stupid or whatever, but it is law. Those regulations and mandatory QA processes exist to make sure that all bases are covered and that you don't get embarrassing 'oopsies' and people fall dead because you forgot to check for something.
Even today, problems still arise, but the goal is to minimize this as much as possible. And when it goes wrong, lawsuits are files for millions of dollars. Whether the distibutor made any money or not doesn't matter. Your well meaning open source project leader -assuming they somehow fullfilled all legal requirements to releasing something for medical use- would be bankrupted in court, even though he never made a penny.
Because all distributors of medical equipment are liable for the damages in case of malfunction. Doesn't matter if you package it up and distribute for free. Your ass is on the line if something goes wrong. That is why there are expensive certifications, regulations, and oversight watchdogs such as the FDA and FAGG (Europe). If you create an ECG appliance, then you had better hope nothing ever goes wrong, because someone dies due to a malfunction, you're bankrupt. That is why even your development and QA processes are subject to severe regulatory requirements.
A short delay? You've obviously never worked in the pharma industry.
It takes about 7 to 9 years between building your installation and FDA market approval.
There is a huge amount of testing and red tape to prevent 'oopsies' like the softenon fuckup.
If a big pharma company decided -today- to retrofit one of their plants for making this product, you'd be a decade further before it would become available. Even with a known drug that would not require additional research. And that is assuming there are no legal hurdles like patents or other things that can slow things down even further. I work in a pharma plant. I started there during the engineering phase so I do have a good idea of what is involved in bringing a drug to market.
I take it you don't have kids? Firstly, 5 and 4 are very different ages and toddlers have wildly varying capabilities. Secondly it also depends a lot on the situation we're talking about. A bus stop near a grand central station is different than the bus stop at the end of the street in a quiet little village where the bus driver knows you.
As for sense of responsibility:
a) they're toddlers, not responsible adults.
b) parents requiring their toddler to travel alone are the irresponsible ones.
That is why little kids need to be under supervision. You cannot expect them to always act rationally and responsibly. They're toddlers ferchrissakes. Not fully developed intelligent mini adults. If something unexpected happens, they're scared, without resources, and unable to help themselves.
The kid is 4. If he 'misses his bus' then something is catastrophically wrong, because a 4 year old should not go to the bus stop and find his way home by himself. Dealing with a 4 year old is at the basic principle- no different from transporting a prisoner. They should always be in the care of someone: a teacher, guardian, babysit, parent,
If you have to wonder if a 4 year old kid will make it home by himself in time for diner, then you're doing it wrong.
I agree there are many applications where allowing a toddler on the phone is nice. But he shouldn't need it to fend for himself.
The super majority doesn't drop. The drop of the supermajority is one of the things introduced by John Paul II and removed again by Benedict. His reason for removing it was that any simple majority could simply block the election until the supermajority requirement had dropped, thus making it completely irrelevant. So now a 2/3 majority is needed at all times.
Far from dodgy companies. This is a common feature in many (all?) cash registers used in small business, especially restaurants.
I know people who work in restaurants, and they told me that this is a public secret.
The way it works is that at the end of the day, you can make the register change the numbers by an amount or a percent. Ther register will then do the math to change the number of coffees served and muffins sold and things like that. It does this so that the numbers still make sense and correlate with expected ratios.
At that point, the business day is closed, the register is printed, and you get some money out of the till under the table. If the inspectors should come in during the day, you can just print whatever the current status is, which will then be immutable at the end of the business day to avoid discrepancies.
This functionality is not advertized in writing, but all sales persons know about it and know how they can explain this to the owners. All major registers have features like this, and I can understand why the inspectors would require open source. Because skimming money becomes an order of magnitude more difficult if you don't have a register to help you create a phony audit trail.