wieerwill/Informatik
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Tables beautified

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
WieErWill 2021-04-28 08:38:07 +02:00
parent c9c5f8f0d3
commit 2715c9f847
1 changed files with 158 additions and 158 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

280
Softwaretechnik 2.md
View File

@ -81,7 +81,7 @@
- [Historische Daten](#historische-daten) - [Historische Daten](#historische-daten)
- [Expert Judgement](#expert-judgement) - [Expert Judgement](#expert-judgement)
- [Proxy-Based Estimates](#proxy-based-estimates) - [Proxy-Based Estimates](#proxy-based-estimates)
- [Function Points 1/7](#function-points-17) - [Function Points](#function-points)
- [Conversion of FP to LOC](#conversion-of-fp-to-loc) - [Conversion of FP to LOC](#conversion-of-fp-to-loc)
- [Examples of Productivity](#examples-of-productivity) - [Examples of Productivity](#examples-of-productivity)
- [Checklist for individual estimates](#checklist-for-individual-estimates) - [Checklist for individual estimates](#checklist-for-individual-estimates)
@ -329,11 +329,11 @@ OpenUP is based on a set of mutually supporting core principles:
Core principles mapping to Agile manifesto Core principles mapping to Agile manifesto
| OpenUP/Basic Key principles | Agile manifesto | | OpenUP/Basic Key principles | Agile manifesto |
| -- | -- | | ---------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- |
Collaborate to align interests and share understanding | Individuals and interactions over process and tools | Collaborate to align interests and share understanding | Individuals and interactions over process and tools |
Evolve to continuously obtain feedback and improve | Responding to change over following a plan | Evolve to continuously obtain feedback and improve | Responding to change over following a plan |
Balance competing priorities to maximize stakeholder value | Customer collaboration over contract negotiation | Balance competing priorities to maximize stakeholder value | Customer collaboration over contract negotiation |
Focus on articulating the architecture | Working software over comprehensive documentation | Focus on articulating the architecture | Working software over comprehensive documentation |
Governance Model - Balancing Agility and Discipline Governance Model - Balancing Agility and Discipline
- OpenUP incorporates a three-tiered governance model to plan, execute, and monitor progress. - OpenUP incorporates a three-tiered governance model to plan, execute, and monitor progress.
@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ Micro-Increments
- More specifically, the objectives and associated process activities are: - More specifically, the objectives and associated process activities are:
| Phase objectives | Activities that address objectives | | Phase objectives | Activities that address objectives |
| -- | -- | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |
| Define a Vision | Initiate Project | | Define a Vision | Initiate Project |
| Identify key system functionality | Identify and Refine Requirements | | Identify key system functionality | Identify and Refine Requirements |
| Determine at least one possible solution | Agree on Technical Approach | | Determine at least one possible solution | Agree on Technical Approach |
@ -384,11 +384,11 @@ Micro-Increments
- At the Lifecycle Architecture Milestone, progress towards meeting these objectives are assessed and a decision to proceed with the same scope, change the scope, or terminate the project is made. - At the Lifecycle Architecture Milestone, progress towards meeting these objectives are assessed and a decision to proceed with the same scope, change the scope, or terminate the project is made.
- More specifically, the objectives and associated process activities are: - More specifically, the objectives and associated process activities are:
Phase objectives | Activities that address objectives | Phase objectives | Activities that address objectives |
-- | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------- |
Get a more detailed understanding of the requirements | Identify and Refine Requirements | Get a more detailed understanding of the requirements | Identify and Refine Requirements |
Design, implement, validate, and baseline an architecture | Develop the Architecture, Develop Solution Increment, Test Solution | Design, implement, validate, and baseline an architecture | Develop the Architecture, Develop Solution Increment, Test Solution |
Mitigate essential risks, and produce accurate schedule and cost estimates | Plan and Manage Iteration, Ongoing Tasks | Mitigate essential risks, and produce accurate schedule and cost estimates | Plan and Manage Iteration, Ongoing Tasks |
### OpenUP Lifecycle - Construction Phase ### OpenUP Lifecycle - Construction Phase
- The primary purpose of the Construction Phase is to develop and verify the solution incrementally. - The primary purpose of the Construction Phase is to develop and verify the solution incrementally.
@ -396,20 +396,20 @@ Mitigate essential risks, and produce accurate schedule and cost estimates | Pla
- More specifically, the objectives and associated process activities are: - More specifically, the objectives and associated process activities are:
| Phase objectives | Activities that address objectives | | Phase objectives | Activities that address objectives |
| -- | -- | | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
Iteratively develop a complete product that is ready to transition to the user community | Identify and Refine Requirements; Develop Solution Increment; Test Solution | | Iteratively develop a complete product that is ready to transition to the user community | Identify and Refine Requirements; Develop Solution Increment; Test Solution |
Minimize development costs and achieve some degree of parallelism | Plan and Manage Iteration Ongoing Tasks | Minimize development costs and achieve some degree of parallelism | Plan and Manage Iteration Ongoing Tasks |
### OpenUP Lifecycle - Transition Phase ### OpenUP Lifecycle - Transition Phase
- The primary purpose of the Transition Phase is to deploy the solution to the operational environment and validate it. - The primary purpose of the Transition Phase is to deploy the solution to the operational environment and validate it.
- At the Product Release Milestone, progress towards meeting these objectives are assessed and a decision to make the product generally available is made. - At the Product Release Milestone, progress towards meeting these objectives are assessed and a decision to make the product generally available is made.
- More specifically, the objectives and associated process activities are: - More specifically, the objectives and associated process activities are:
Phase objectives | Activities that address objectives | | Phase objectives | Activities that address objectives |
| -- | -- | | ----------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------- |
Beta test to validate that user expectations are met | Ongoing Tasks; Develop Solution Increment; Test Solution | | Beta test to validate that user expectations are met | Ongoing Tasks; Develop Solution Increment; Test Solution |
Achieve stakeholder concurrence that deployment is complete | Plan and Manage Iteration; Test Solution | | Achieve stakeholder concurrence that deployment is complete | Plan and Manage Iteration; Test Solution |
Improve future project performance through lessons learned | Plan and Manage Iteration | Improve future project performance through lessons learned | Plan and Manage Iteration |
### OpenUP Disciplines ### OpenUP Disciplines
- A discipline is a collection of tasks that are related to a major "area of concern" within the overall project. - A discipline is a collection of tasks that are related to a major "area of concern" within the overall project.
@ -720,15 +720,15 @@ Kano Model
Example: Literature Search Example: Literature Search
| Name | Weblink | | Name | Weblink |
| --- | ---- | | ----------------- | ------------------------------------------- |
Web of Knowledge | http://www.webofknowledge.com/ | Web of Knowledge | http://www.webofknowledge.com/ |
IEEE explore | http://ieeexplore.ieee.org | IEEE explore | http://ieeexplore.ieee.org |
ACM | http://dl.acm.org/ | ACM | http://dl.acm.org/ |
Scirus | http://www.scirus.com | Scirus | http://www.scirus.com |
DBLP | http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/ | DBLP | http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/ |
Citeseer(X) | http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu | Citeseer(X) | http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu |
Google Scholar | http://scholar.google.de/ | Google Scholar | http://scholar.google.de/ |
Patentdatenbanken | http://worldwide.espacenet.com/ | Patentdatenbanken | http://worldwide.espacenet.com/ |
### Patentrecherche ### Patentrecherche
- Viele Informationen sind nur in Patenten verfügbar - Viele Informationen sind nur in Patenten verfügbar
@ -863,32 +863,32 @@ Document Structure
Please read and observe the following directions carefully: Please read and observe the following directions carefully:
"For each question, fill in the upper and lower bounds that, in your opinion, give you a 90% chance of including the correct value. Be careful not to make your ranges either too wide or too narrow. Make them wide enough so that, in your best judgment, the ranges give you a 90% chance of including the correct answer. Please do not research any of the answers-this quiz is intended to assess your estimation skills, not your research skills. You must fill in an answer [or each item; an omitted item will be scored as an incorrect item. Please limit your time on this exercise to 10 minutes." "For each question, fill in the upper and lower bounds that, in your opinion, give you a 90% chance of including the correct value. Be careful not to make your ranges either too wide or too narrow. Make them wide enough so that, in your best judgment, the ranges give you a 90% chance of including the correct answer. Please do not research any of the answers-this quiz is intended to assess your estimation skills, not your research skills. You must fill in an answer [or each item; an omitted item will be scored as an incorrect item. Please limit your time on this exercise to 10 minutes."
Low Estimate | High Estimate | Question | | Low Estimate | Question |
--- | --- | --- | | ------------ | ------------------------------------------------------ |
|| Surface temperature of the sun | | Surface temperature of the sun |
|| Latitude of Shanghai | | Latitude of Shanghai |
|| Area of the Asian continent | | Area of the Asian continent |
|| The year of Alexander the Great‘s birth | | The year of Alexander the Great‘s birth |
|| Total value of U.S. currency in circulation in 2004 | | Total value of U.S. currency in circulation in 2004 |
|| Total volume of the Great Lakes | | Total volume of the Great Lakes |
|| Worldwide box office receipts for the movie _Titanic_ | | Worldwide box office receipts for the movie _Titanic_ |
|| Total length of the coastline of the Pacific Ocean | | Total length of the coastline of the Pacific Ocean |
|| Number of book titles published in the U.S. since 1976 | | Number of book titles published in the U.S. since 1976 |
|| Heaviest blue whale ever recorded | | Heaviest blue whale ever recorded |
Results: A Little Estimation Game Results: A Little Estimation Game
Low Estimate | Question | | Low Estimate | Question |
--- | --- | | --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ |
6000 ºC | Surface temperature of the sun | 6000 ºC | Surface temperature of the sun |
31º | North Latitude of Shanghai | 31º | North Latitude of Shanghai |
44.390.000 km^2 | Area of the Asian continent | 44.390.000 km^2 | Area of the Asian continent |
356 BC | The year of Alexander the Great‘s birth | 356 BC | The year of Alexander the Great‘s birth |
$719.9 billion | Total value of U.S. currency in circulation in 2004 | $719.9 billion | Total value of U.S. currency in circulation in 2004 |
23000 km^3 | Total volume of the Great Lakes | 23000 km^3 | Total volume of the Great Lakes |
1,834 x 10^9 $ | Worldwide box office receipts for the movie Titanic | 1,834 x 10^9 $ | Worldwide box office receipts for the movie Titanic |
135663 km | Total length of the coastline of the Pacific Ocean | 135663 km | Total length of the coastline of the Pacific Ocean |
22 million | Number of book titles published in the U.S. since 1976 | 22 million | Number of book titles published in the U.S. since 1976 |
170 metric tons | Heaviest blue whale ever recorded | 170 metric tons | Heaviest blue whale ever recorded |
-> Most people reach a 30% confidence level if they believe it is a 90% confidence level! -> Most people reach a 30% confidence level if they believe it is a 90% confidence level!
@ -925,20 +925,20 @@ Improvement in estimation at the Boeing Company. As with the U.S. Air Force proj
##### Project Outcomes by Project Size ##### Project Outcomes by Project Size
| Size in Function Points (and Approximate Lines of Code) | Early | On Time | Late | Failed (Canceled) | | Size in Function Points (and Approximate Lines of Code) | Early | On Time | Late | Failed (Canceled) |
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | ------------------------------------------------------- | ----- | ------- | ---- | ----------------- |
10 FP (1,000 LOC) | 11% | 81% | 6% | 2% | 10 FP (1,000 LOC) | 11% | 81% | 6% | 2% |
100 FP (10,000 LOC) | 6% | 75% | 12% | 7% | 100 FP (10,000 LOC) | 6% | 75% | 12% | 7% |
1,000 FP (100,000 LOC) | 1% | 61% | 18% | 20% | 1,000 FP (100,000 LOC) | 1% | 61% | 18% | 20% |
10,000 FP (1,000,000 LOC) | <1% | 28% | 24% | 48% | 10,000 FP (1,000,000 LOC) | <1% | 28% | 24% | 48% |
100,000 FP (10,000,000 LOC) | 0% | 14% | 21% | 65% | 100,000 FP (10,000,000 LOC) | 0% | 14% | 21% | 65% |
[McCo 2006], p25, Source: Estimating Software Costs (Jones 1998). [McCo 2006], p25, Source: Estimating Software Costs (Jones 1998).
##### Communication Paths ##### Communication Paths
Paths (P) | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6 | ... | 15 | Paths (P) | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6 | ... | 15 |
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --------- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
Nodes (n) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ... | 6 | Nodes (n) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ... | 6 |
$$P=\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} i=\frac{(n-1)*((n-1)+1)}{2}=\frac{2*(n-1)}{2}$$ $$P=\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} i=\frac{(n-1)*((n-1)+1)}{2}=\frac{2*(n-1)}{2}$$
Gaußsche Summenformel: $\sum_{i=1}^n = 1+2+3+...+n=\frac{n(n+1)}{2}$ Gaußsche Summenformel: $\sum_{i=1}^n = 1+2+3+...+n=\frac{n(n+1)}{2}$
@ -1002,7 +1002,7 @@ Source: Adapted from Estimating Software Costs (Jones 1998) and Software Cost Es
Which quantities to count? [McCo 2006, p86..88] Which quantities to count? [McCo 2006, p86..88]
| Quantity to Count | Historical Data Needed to Convert the Count to an Estimate | | Quantity to Count | Historical Data Needed to Convert the Count to an Estimate |
|--- | --- | | ----------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Marketing requirements | Average effort hours per requirement for development | | Marketing requirements | Average effort hours per requirement for development |
| | Average effort hours per requirement for independent testing | | | Average effort hours per requirement for independent testing |
| | Average effort hours per requirement for documentation | | | Average effort hours per requirement for documentation |
@ -1010,29 +1010,29 @@ Which quantities to count? [McCo 2006, p86..88]
| Features | Average effort hours per feature for development and/or testing | | Features | Average effort hours per feature for development and/or testing |
| Use cases | Average total effort hours per use case | | Use cases | Average total effort hours per use case |
| | Average number of use cases that can be delivered in a particular amount of calendar time | | | Average number of use cases that can be delivered in a particular amount of calendar time |
| Stories | Average total effort hours per story | Stories | Average total effort hours per story |
|| Average number of stories that can be delivered in a particular amount of calendar time | | Average number of stories that can be delivered in a particular amount of calendar time |
| Engineering Requirements | Average number of engineering requirements that can be formally inspected per hour | Engineering Requirements | Average number of engineering requirements that can be formally inspected per hour |
|| Average effort hours per requirement for development/test/documentation | | Average effort hours per requirement for development/test/documentation |
| Function Points | Average development/test/documentation effort per Function Point | Function Points | Average development/test/documentation effort per Function Point |
|| Average lines of code in the target language per Function Point | | Average lines of code in the target language per Function Point |
| Change requests | Average development/test/documentation effort per change request (depending on variability of the change requests, the data might be decomposed into average effort per small, medium, and large change request) | Change requests | Average development/test/documentation effort per change request (depending on variability of the change requests, the data might be decomposed into average effort per small, medium, and large change request) |
| Web pages | Average effort per Web page for user interface work | Web pages | Average effort per Web page for user interface work |
|| Average whole-project effort per Web page (less reliable, but can be an interesting data point) | | Average whole-project effort per Web page (less reliable, but can be an interesting data point) |
| Reports | Average effort per report for report work | Reports | Average effort per report for report work |
| Dialog Boxes | Average effort per dialog for user interface work | Dialog Boxes | Average effort per dialog for user interface work |
| Database Tables | Average effort per table for database work | Database Tables | Average effort per table for database work |
|| Average whole-project effort per table (less reliable, but can be an interesting data point) | | Average whole-project effort per table (less reliable, but can be an interesting data point) |
| Classes | Average effort hours per class for development | Classes | Average effort hours per class for development |
|| Average effort hours to formally inspect a class | | Average effort hours to formally inspect a class |
|| Average effort hours per class for testing | | Average effort hours per class for testing |
| Defects found | Average effort hours per defect to fix | Defects found | Average effort hours per defect to fix |
|| Average effort hours per defect to regression test | | Average effort hours per defect to regression test |
|| Average number of defects that can be corrected in a particular amount of calendar time | | Average number of defects that can be corrected in a particular amount of calendar time |
| Configurations settings | Average effort per configuration setting | Configurations settings | Average effort per configuration setting |
| Lines of code already written | Average number of defects per line of code | Lines of code already written | Average number of defects per line of code |
|| Average lines of code that can be formally inspected per hour | | Average lines of code that can be formally inspected per hour |
|| Average new lines of code from one release to the next | | Average new lines of code from one release to the next |
### Historische Daten ### Historische Daten
- The organization‘s historical data - The organization‘s historical data
@ -1069,56 +1069,56 @@ Classify existing components/features ... (small, medium, large) ... and estimat
[McCo 2006, p138] [McCo 2006, p138]
| Example | Size | Average Staff Days per Feature | Number of Features | Estimated Effort (Staff Days) | | Example | Size | Average Staff Days per Feature | Number of Features | Estimated Effort (Staff Days) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | -------------- | ---------- | ------------------------------ | ------------------ | ----------------------------- |
| Temp | Very Small | 48 | 6 | 288 | | Temp | Very Small | 48 | 6 | 288 |
| Speed | Small | 53 | 20 | 1060 | Speed | Small | 53 | 20 | 1060 |
| Daytrip | Medium | 60 | 4 | 240 | Daytrip | Medium | 60 | 4 | 240 |
| Heartbeat Zone | Large | 66 | 5 | 330 | Heartbeat Zone | Large | 66 | 5 | 330 |
| Navigation | Very Large | 107 | 3 | 321 | Navigation | Very Large | 107 | 3 | 321 |
| Total | | - | 38 | 2239 | Total | | - | 38 | 2239 |
### Function Points 1/7 ### Function Points
- Developed by Allan Albrecht, IBM, 1970 - Developed by Allan Albrecht, IBM, 1970
- Assess each functional requirement - Assess each functional requirement
![Balz 1996](Assets/Softwaretechnik2-Function-Points.png) ![Balz 1996](Assets/Softwaretechnik2-Function-Points.png)
Category | Criterion | Simple | Middle | Complex | | Category | Criterion | Simple | Middle | Complex |
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | -------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------------------ | ------------------------------ |
Input | Number of different data Elements | 1-5 | 6-10 | >10 | | Input | Number of different data Elements | 1-5 | 6-10 | >10 |
| Validate Input | Formal | Formal & logically | Formal & logically & DB-access | | | Validate Input | Formal | Formal & logically | Formal & logically & DB-access |
| Required complexity of the user interface | low | average | high | | | Required complexity of the user interface | low | average | high |
Queries | Number of different keys | 1 | 2 | >2 | | Queries | Number of different keys | 1 | 2 | >2 |
| Required complexity of the user interface | low | average | high | | | Required complexity of the user interface | low | average | high |
Output | Number of colums | 1-6 | 7-15 | >15 | | Output | Number of colums | 1-6 | 7-15 | >15 |
| different data elements | 1-5 | 6-10 | >10 | | | different data elements | 1-5 | 6-10 | >10 |
| Change of output groups (e.g. three data items to be printed but in two different groups -> grouped GUI elements) | 1 | 2-3 | >3 | | | Change of output groups (e.g. three data items to be printed but in two different groups -> grouped GUI elements) | 1 | 2-3 | >3 |
| Preparation for printing data elements | none | some | many | | | Preparation for printing data elements | none | some | many |
Database | Number of Keys | 1 | 2 | >2 | | Database | Number of Keys | 1 | 2 | >2 |
| Different data elements | 1-20 | 21-40 | >40 | | | Different data elements | 1-20 | 21-40 | >40 |
| Use existing data? (can be re-used) | yes | - | no | | | Use existing data? (can be re-used) | yes | - | no |
| Change of an already implemented data(structure) | no | yes | - | | | Change of an already implemented data(structure) | no | yes | - |
Reference Data | Read-only-files: Number of different data elements | 1-5 | 6-10 | >10 | | Reference Data | Read-only-files: Number of different data elements | 1-5 | 6-10 | >10 |
| Read-only-files: Number of keys | 1 | 2 | >2 | | | Read-only-files: Number of keys | 1 | 2 | >2 |
| Tables: Number of different data elements | 1-5 | 6-10 | >10 | | | Tables: Number of different data elements | 1-5 | 6-10 | >10 |
| Tables: Dimensions | 1 | 2 | 3 | | | Tables: Dimensions | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Category | Classification | Weight | Category | Classification | Weight |
--- | --- | --- | -------------- | -------------- | ------ |
Input | simple | 3 | Input | simple | 3 |
| middle | 4 | | middle | 4 |
| complex | 6 | | complex | 6 |
Queries | simple | 3 | Queries | simple | 3 |
| middle | 4 | | middle | 4 |
| complex | 6 | | complex | 6 |
Output | simple | 3 | Output | simple | 3 |
| middle | 5 | | middle | 5 |
| complex | 7 | | complex | 7 |
Database | simple | 3 | Database | simple | 3 |
| middle | 10 | | middle | 10 |
| complex | 15 | | complex | 15 |
Refernce Data | simple | 3 | Reference Data | simple | 3 |
| middle | 7 | | middle | 7 |
| complex | 10 | | complex | 10 |
![](Assets/Softwaretechnik2-Function-Points2.png) ![](Assets/Softwaretechnik2-Function-Points2.png)
@ -1127,17 +1127,17 @@ Refernce Data | simple | 3
##### Examples of Productivity ##### Examples of Productivity
| Product | New Lines of Code Equivalent | Staff Years | Year Built | Approx. Cost in 2006 Dollars | $/LOC | LOC/Staff Year | | Product | New Lines of Code Equivalent | Staff Years | Year Built | Approx. Cost in 2006 Dollars | $/LOC | LOC/Staff Year |
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | --------------------------------- | ---------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------------- | ----- | -------------- |
IBM Chief Programmer Team Project | 83,000 | 9 | 1968 | 1,400,000* | $17 | 9,200 | IBM Chief Programmer Team Project | 83,000 | 9 | 1968 | 1,400,000* | $17 | 9,200 |
Lincoln Continental | 83,000 | 35 | 1989 | 2,900,000 | $35 | 2,400 | Lincoln Continental | 83,000 | 35 | 1989 | 2,900,000 | $35 | 2,400 |
IBM Checkout Scanner | 90,000 | 58 | 1989 | 4,900,000 | $55 | 1,600 | IBM Checkout Scanner | 90,000 | 58 | 1989 | 4,900,000 | $55 | 1,600 |
Microsoft Word for Windows 1.0 | 249,000| 55| 1989 | 8,500,000* | $34| 4,500 | Microsoft Word for Windows 1.0 | 249,000 | 55 | 1989 | 8,500,000* | $34 | 4,500 |
NASA SEL Project | 249,000| 24 | 2002| 3,700,000*| $15 | 10,000 | NASA SEL Project | 249,000 | 24 | 2002 | 3,700,000* | $15 | 10,000 |
Lotus 123 v. 3 | 400,000 | 263 | 1989 | 36,000,000 | $90 | 1,500 | Lotus 123 v. 3 | 400,000 | 263 | 1989 | 36,000,000 | $90 | 1,500 |
Microsoft Excel 3.0 | 649,000 | 50* | 1990| 7,700,000 | $12 | 13,000 | Microsoft Excel 3.0 | 649,000 | 50* | 1990 | 7,700,000 | $12 | 13,000 |
Citibank Teller Machine | 780,000 | 150 | 1989 | 22,000,000 | $28 | 5,200 | Citibank Teller Machine | 780,000 | 150 | 1989 | 22,000,000 | $28 | 5,200 |
Windows NT 3.1 (first version) | 2,880,000 | 2,000* | 1994 | 200,000,000 | $70 | 1,400 | Windows NT 3.1 (first version) | 2,880,000 | 2,000* | 1994 | 200,000,000 | $70 | 1,400 |
Space Shuttle | 25,600,000 | 22,096 | 1989 | 2,000,000,000 | $77 | 1,200 | Space Shuttle | 25,600,000 | 22,096 | 1989 | 2,000,000,000 | $77 | 1,200 |
*Estimated *Estimated