Russel Jones

[danbo]

Geez...Does Microsoft pay Russel Jones to spout such hyped-up, drum-beating
drivel..? Developers have a solid and legitimate right to complain. VB6
is a fine product from which I have created many solutions to my clients.
Microsoft's .NET "vision" plays like just another ploy to monopolize a market.
The consumer need for "Web Services" is an unproven and speculative concept
at best. Customers want solutions. They don't give a **** about some hyped
corporate vision. Why abandon something that works..? Because you are Microsoft...and
you can.

[Zane Thomas]

On 24 Jan 2001 21:58:52 -0800, "danbo" <danbo@earthlink.net> wrote:

>The consumer need for "Web Services" is an unproven and speculative concept
>at best.

If you think .net is all about "web services" I think you're missing a
lot.


---
Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

[Sean Taffin]

> Geez...Does Microsoft pay Russel Jones to spout such hyped-up,
drum-beating drivel..?

This though is unavoidable. *g*

[Patrick Steele]

In article <3a6fc09c@news.devx.com>, danbo@earthlink.net says...
>
> VB6 is a fine product from which I have created many solutions to my clients.

And you may continue to do so.

> Why abandon something that works..?

Exactly! Why abandon VB6 if it's working for you?

--
Patrick Steele
(psteele@ipdsolution.com)
Lead Software Architect

[Nancy Folsom]

In article <3a6fc09c@news.devx.com>, danbo@earthlink.net says...
>
> Geez...Does Microsoft pay Russel Jones to spout such hyped-up, drum-beating
> drivel..?

If he doesn't share your opinion it's "drivel" and he has less of a
right to express it than you?

--
Nancy
So that all can benefit from the discussion,
please post all followups to the newsgroup.

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Nancy --

> > Geez...Does Microsoft pay Russel Jones to spout such hyped-up, drum-beating
> > drivel..?
>
> If he doesn't share your opinion it's "drivel" and he has less of a
> right to express it than you?

Hmmmmm, I must've missed it. Where was that piece labeled "opinion"? It does say
"ednote" in the URL, but it's linked to under the heading, "Featured Articles". In
fact, a text search of that page doesn't produce the word "opinion" even once. Don't
see any graphics to that effect, either.

Thanks... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb

[Zane Thomas]

Karl,

When I see a picture with the caption:

Russell Jones,
Senior Editor, DevX

I know I'm reading an editorial, and I also know you're not naive about
such things. :-)


---
Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Zane --

I just thought after that _last_ Advertorial escapade, Lori had learned how to
properly label things. <g>

Later... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb


"Zane Thomas" <zane@mabry.com> wrote in message
news:3a8f8e9c.853504890@news.devx.com...
> Karl,
>
> When I see a picture with the caption:
>
> Russell Jones,
> Senior Editor, DevX
>
> I know I'm reading an editorial, and I also know you're not naive about
> such things. :-)
>
>
> ---
> Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Phil --

"Phil Weber" <pweber@devx.com> wrote in message news:3a709304$1@news.devx.com...
> > Hmm, I must've missed it. Where was that piece labeled
> > "opinion?"
>
> Karl: Directly beneath the link to Russell's piece on the DevX home page is
> a link that reads, "Previous Editorials and Opinions." That would seem to
> suggest that Russell's piece is also an "editorial or opinion," would it
> not?

Considered that notion, and rejected it, because that would imply the same for the
two articles preceeding it under the same heading ("Featured Articles"). Nope, it's
highly misleading. A lawyer would be proud. ;-)

Sorry... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb

[Phil Weber]

> Hmm, I must've missed it. Where was that piece labeled
> "opinion?"

Karl: Directly beneath the link to Russell's piece on the DevX home page is
a link that reads, "Previous Editorials and Opinions." That would seem to
suggest that Russell's piece is also an "editorial or opinion," would it
not?
---
Phil Weber
DevX.com, Inc.

[Zane Thomas]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 12:39:52 -0800, "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@mvps.org>
wrote:

>I just thought after that _last_ Advertorial escapade, Lori had learned how to
>properly label things. <g>

Yeah, I thought about that too. However, there is a difference however
between something written by an editor and an advertorial masquerading as
a technical article.


---
Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

[Phil Weber]

> Nope, it's highly misleading. A lawyer would be proud. ;-)

Guess that depends on whether you're looking for a reason to complain, or
willing to give the benefit of the doubt.
---
Phil Weber
DevX.com, Inc.

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Zane --

> >I just thought after that _last_ Advertorial escapade, Lori had learned how to
> >properly label things. <g>
>
> Yeah, I thought about that too. However, there is a difference however
> between something written by an editor and an advertorial masquerading as
> a technical article.

Specifically, the author in question?

Later... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Phil --

> > Nope, it's highly misleading. A lawyer would be proud. ;-)
>
> Guess that depends on whether you're looking for a reason to complain, or
> willing to give the benefit of the doubt.

Guess that depends on whether you use words like "complaining" to mischaracterize the
purpose behind an adversary's honestly expressed opinion. Wish it hadn't come to
that, Phil. I still consider _you_ a friend, nonetheless.

Thanks... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb

[Bill McCarthy]

Hi Phil,

"Phil Weber" <pweber@devx.com> wrote in message
news:3a7096e4$1@news.devx.com...
>
> Guess that depends on whether you're looking for a reason to complain, or
> willing to give the benefit of the doubt.

JFTR: When I looked at that article, I did not realise it was an editorial,
but then again I rarely read the devx site, (only vbpj). The link to the
article from the main page clearly has it under the heading of Feature
Article, and I thought that is what it was until the issue was raised here
that is.

Addmittedly, I don't know Russell, and when Ray and others were talking
about some article by him (before they posted a link) I did a search for
articles by him. That's probably why I thought it was another one of his
articles, as that was the references I had. But in any case, especially
after the (*NOT Bill*) McCarthy articles debates, I can't really see any
reason not to have a title on the article like VBPJ would such as Editor's
Note or Editor's Opinion or even Guest Opinion.

Anyway, so is it officially just an *opinion* article ?

[Zane Thomas]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 13:35:03 -0800, "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@mvps.org>
wrote:

>> Yeah, I thought about that too. However, there is a difference however
>> between something written by an editor and an advertorial masquerading as
>> a technical article.
>
>Specifically, the author in question?

Yeah one was an editor, I expect editorials from editors. :-)


---
Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

[Phil Weber]

> Guess that depends on whether you use words like "complaining"
> to mischaracterize the purpose behind an adversary's honestly
> expressed opinion.

Karl: I apologize for the mischaracterization. It's just that you've been
doing a lot of muckraking lately, here and on your site and in the trade
press, so it's difficult to distinguish your "honestly expressed opinions"
from complaining.

> I still consider _you_ a friend, nonetheless.

And I you. I hope you know me well enough to know that I don't take anything
said here personally, and these discussions rarely make me angry. It's just
talk. :-)
---
Phil Weber

[Phil Weber]

> When I looked at that article, I did not realise it was an editorial...
> The link to the article from the main page clearly has it under the
> heading of Feature Article, and I thought that is what it was...

Bill: Fair enough. Yes, DevX editorials should be more clearly labeled, no
argument there. I merely object to Karl's suggestion that the poor labeling
is intended to be deliberately misleading.

> Anyway, so is it officially just an *opinion* article?

I would hope that an opinion piece would be clearly distinguishable, based
on its content, from a news or technical how-to article. (Yes, Russell's
piece expresses his opinions.)
---
Phil Weber
DevX.com, Inc.

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Zane --

> >> Yeah, I thought about that too. However, there is a difference however
> >> between something written by an editor and an advertorial masquerading as
> >> a technical article.
> >
> >Specifically, the author in question?
>
> Yeah one was an editor, I expect editorials from editors. :-)

Hmmmm, on the VBPJ masthead, *I*'m listed as a Contributing Editor. As is Matt
Curland, Deborah Kurata, Dan Appleman, yadda, yadda, yadda.

(Yes, I'm ducking! <vbg>)

Later... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb

[Zane Thomas]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:47:57 -0800, "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@mvps.org>
wrote:

>Hmmmm, on the VBPJ masthead, *I*'m listed as a Contributing Editor. As is Matt
>Curland, Deborah Kurata, Dan Appleman, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Hmmm, I'm still there too I think. :-)


---
Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Phil --

> > Guess that depends on whether you use words like "complaining"
> > to mischaracterize the purpose behind an adversary's honestly
> > expressed opinion.
>
> Karl: I apologize for the mischaracterization.

Accepted! But you of all folks should know, I don't "complain". I "get even". ;-)

> It's just that you've been
> doing a lot of muckraking lately,

Hmmm, second or third time today you've sent me scurrying for dictionary.com! <g> I
guess I can live with the first characterization, but I must *vehemently* object if
you're mean it in the second sense!

http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=muckraking

I do not gossip, Phil, and would challenge you to substantiate that, if that's your
claim.

> here and on your site and in the trade press,

Yeah, word spreads. Hard to control, once it starts.

> so it's difficult to distinguish your "honestly expressed opinions"
> from complaining.

I'm trying *very* hard to remain above the level of expressing "pain,
dissatisfaction, or resentment" and sticking 100% to the facts of the situation. If
you see otherwise, particularly in the last week or so, a tap on the shoulder would
be appreciated.

> > I still consider _you_ a friend, nonetheless.
>
> And I you. I hope you know me well enough to know that I don't take anything
> said here personally, and these discussions rarely make me angry. It's just
> talk. :-)

Yeah, me too. (Long as no one tries speaking for me, anyway. ;-)

Thanks... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Zane --

> >Hmmmm, on the VBPJ masthead, *I*'m listed as a Contributing Editor. As is Matt
> >Curland, Deborah Kurata, Dan Appleman, yadda, yadda, yadda.
>
> Hmmm, I'm still there too I think. :-)

Oughta be, you silly editor, you! ;-)

Later... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb

[Bill McCarthy]

Hi Phil,

"Phil Weber" <pweber@devx.com> wrote in message
news:3a70aac0$1@news.devx.com...
>
> Bill: Fair enough. Yes, DevX editorials should be more clearly labeled, no
> argument there. I merely object to Karl's suggestion that the poor
labeling
> is intended to be deliberately misleading.

Honestly, there was no labeling on the doc, and I think calling the link
below it on the main page as a label is strectching it. But anyway, we
agree that opinions, especially those likely to stir up some contreversy
should be clearly marked as opinion. Actually I thought there was given an
undertaking to do so after the last episode <g>

> > Anyway, so is it officially just an *opinion* article?
>
> I would hope that an opinion piece would be clearly distinguishable, based
> on its content, from a news or technical how-to article. (Yes, Russell's
> piece expresses his opinions.)
> ---

LOL! I should have put the *'s around the *just* too <bgd&r>

[Phil Weber]

> I guess I can live with the first characterization, but I must
> *vehemently* object if you're mean it in the second sense!

Karl: This is the meaning I had in mind:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=muckrake . No gossip involved.

> I'm trying *very* hard to remain above the level of expressing
> "pain, dissatisfaction, or resentment" and sticking 100% to the
> facts of the situation. If you see otherwise, particularly in the
> last week or so, a tap on the shoulder would be appreciated.

Well, maybe I'm reading too much into your behavior, but the fact that
you've become such a vocal detractor of VB.NET seems to indicate underlying
"pain, dissatisfaction, or resentment."
---
Phil Weber

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Phil --

> > I guess I can live with the first characterization, but I must
> > *vehemently* object if you're mean it in the second sense!
>
> Karl: This is the meaning I had in mind:
> http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=muckrake . No gossip involved.

You flatter me. <blush>

> > I'm trying *very* hard to remain above the level of expressing
> > "pain, dissatisfaction, or resentment" and sticking 100% to the
> > facts of the situation. If you see otherwise, particularly in the
> > last week or so, a tap on the shoulder would be appreciated.
>
> Well, maybe I'm reading too much into your behavior, but the fact that
> you've become such a vocal detractor of VB.NET seems to indicate underlying
> "pain, dissatisfaction, or resentment."

Heh, reality couldn't be *farther* from that assessment! Believe me. :-)

Later... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb

[Mike Mitchell]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 10:18:31 -0700, Nancy Folsom
<nancy_folsom@hotmail.com> wrote:

>In article <3a6fc09c@news.devx.com>, danbo@earthlink.net says...
>>
>> Geez...Does Microsoft pay Russel Jones to spout such hyped-up, drum-beating
>> drivel..?
>
>If he doesn't share your opinion it's "drivel" and he has less of a
>right to express it than you?
>

Tell you what, drivel or no, I'll be even less likely in future to
read Visual Basic Programmer's Journal, if they continue to publish
only a santised, cheerleader view of .NET and VB.NET. Where's the
balance? Can't dare to irritate MS, can ya!!?

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:36:27 -0800, "Phil Weber" <pweber@devx.com>
wrote:

>Karl: I apologize for the mischaracterization. It's just that you've been
>doing a lot of muckraking lately, here and on your site and in the trade
>press, so it's difficult to distinguish your "honestly expressed opinions"
>from complaining.
>

Oh, so honest criticism - from Karl or anyone else - is "muckraking",
is it? What nonsense you do write somethimes, Phil! Not often, but
when you do, it sure hits the fan.

Now *that's* what I call "muckraking"! Honest criticism is something
else.

MM

[Jon Ogden]

"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:3a70ae20$1@news.devx.com...
> Hi Phil --

> > It's just that you've been
> > doing a lot of muckraking lately,
>
> Hmmm, second or third time today you've sent me scurrying for
dictionary.com! <g> I
> guess I can live with the first characterization, but I must *vehemently*
object if
> you're mean it in the second sense!
>

It used to be that journalists considered muckraking to be an honorable
tradition. It was only the corrupt fat cats who wanted the muck to stay
undisturbed and not stinking up the place. H.L. Menken was a muckraker, so
maybe it's a compliment?

Good Luck
Jon

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Jon --

> It used to be that journalists considered muckraking to be an honorable
> tradition. It was only the corrupt fat cats who wanted the muck to stay
> undisturbed and not stinking up the place. H.L. Menken was a muckraker, so
> maybe it's a compliment?

Yeah, I will choose to take it as one! :-)

I hate it when good words are turned bad. Reagan did this to "liberal", and I won't
let Phil do it to "muckraker"! <g>

Thanks... Karl
--
http://www.mvps.org/vb