Press Release: Microsoft Language Innovation (long)

In a press conference earlier today, Microsoft and the U.S. Department of
Commerce announced the development of a new language. . . . English.NET. The
language development "comes as a result of a settlement agreement with the
Department of Justice" one Microsoft representative was quoted.

Fred, a spokesman for Microsoft, claimed that the new language would serve
as a basis for future language development allowing cross-lingual support.
In addition, numerous language improvements have been made to accommodate
common concerns with the English language.

"The English language as been streamlined to provide increased stability and
organization, as well as grammatical logic. No more i-before-e rules to
contend with." said Fred. A U.S. spokesperson was quoted as saying, "We hope
that English.NET will give America a competitive advantage over other
languages available today. We hope to re-capture some constituents who have
chosen to migrate to the Spanish 2EE language."

Although high hopes are placed upon English.NET, many literary scholars,
poets and writers are expressing concerns. Common complaints are that many
literary works will not translate well to the new language and will need to
be scrapped altogether. Complaints of unnecessary grammatical rules abound
as well, such as the requirement of qualifying all nouns and verbs with
specific adjectives and adverbs. In addition, several existing language
elements have been changed or removed such as riot and revolution, whose
usage was deemed too dangerous to leave at the discression of the public.
Changes in monetary elements are also apparent, such as the change of
Dollars to Pennies. A Department of Commerce representative was quoted as
saying, "These (changes) will bring the language more in line with other
languages in use today and adjust the language to the changing economical
architecture."

One requirement of the new language is the Common Language Translator which
must be installed into every person using the language. The U.S. Department
of Health has promised a smooth transition to English.NET however, providing
an aggressive plan to install the translation chip in individuals upon any
access to a hospitals. Future versions of people will come with the chip
implanted at birth. There are already rumors of European countries porting
their own language to the CMT specification (which has been submitted to the
U.N.)

Jason Thorn wrote:
>
> In a press conference earlier today, Microsoft and the U.S. Department of
> Commerce announced the development of a new language. . . . English.NET. The
> language development "comes as a result of a settlement agreement with the
> Department of Justice" one Microsoft representative was quoted.
>
I realize this is a parody, but I'd be completely willing to learn a
decent natural language, if I could speak it all the time. English is
possibly even worse than VB6.

Bill

"Michael (michka) Kaplan" wrote:
>
> Try Esperanto.
>
> Or Klingon.
>
I'v heard Esperanto is pretty good, but it doesn't really matter,
because no one else speaks it.

Bill

> Try Esperanto.

Are you a "Stainless Steel Rat" fan?

"Jason Thorn" <j_thorn@hotmail.com> wrote:

>One requirement of the new language is the Common Language Translator >which
must be installed into every person using the language.

I don't saw very much point in your analogy at all. :-(

In my mind, the main reason to all these protests against MS changes in VB
.NET, is that VB was such a easy language, that all ‘developers’ with limited
learning skills has become it’s users. It's these so called ‘developers’
who couldn’t learn any other language who are screaming and crying at the
moment.

On 9 Feb 2001 00:29:08 -0800, "Mike" <mike@nospam.com> wrote:

>It's these so called ‘developers’ who couldn’t learn any other
>language who are screaming and crying at the moment.

I didn't find the post particularly amusing either. But I think that
offering up such a simplistic explanation of the current "screaming and
crying" is unwarranted, and insulting to the many fine VB developers I
know and respect.

There are a number of different perspectives on the portability issue, and
the steep-learning curve in .net, all with various merit depending upon
how those things impact a person's interests.

That said, I think that some of the issues are over-hyped by people who
are simply enjoying arguing.



---
Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

Very off topic ...

"Michael \(michka\) Kaplan" <former_mvp@spamfree.trigeminal.nospam.com> wrote:
>Try Esperanto.
>Or Klingon.
>MichKa

See
http://babel.uoregon.edu/yamada/fonts/
They have Romulan, Tolkien and Morse, too!
HTH

VB.Net is definitely a different language.

I went with Deseret for awhile - she's pretty cute.

Good Luck
Jon

"Michael (michka) Kaplan" <former_mvp@spamfree.trigeminal.nospam.com> wrote
in message news:3a838bc3@news.devx.com...
> No, not at all. I prefer English, with Tamil to place and Thai to show.
>
> Its just that if you prefer invented languages, then I would go with
> Deseret, or Klingon, or Esperanto.
>
> --
> MichKa
>

No they are not. When I do all my projects in VB I still recognize nonsense
when I see it. If the VB philosophy is making programming easy, why then
make it hard?

/Thomas

"Mike" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in message news:3a83aa54@news.devx.com...
> In my mind, the main reason to all these protests against MS changes in VB
> NET, is that VB was such a easy language, that all 'developers' with
limited
> learning skills has become it's users. It's these so called 'developers'
> who couldn't learn any other language who are screaming and crying at the
> moment.