A dose of reality


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: A dose of reality

  1. #1
    unposted Guest

    A dose of reality


    I dont have time to read what ground has already been covered on this subject
    here, but I will make this plain and simple.

    VBScript is worthless, and I dont pity people who bit Microshaft's fishhook
    in the first place to use it. As java was in development, Microsoft insisted
    on developing VBscript, part of their multi-pronged attack on Java and other
    open-source (or not owned exclusively by them) technologies.

    Surrrrreeeee, what if MS owned the most popular scripting engine on the web,
    from both the client and server sides? It would be simple to then introduce
    a 'superscript server engine' that cost $15,000/server and a development
    program that cost $5000/license. They just simply put bets on all horses.
    The chances may have been 1 in 10 but VB script might have won if they could
    pay enough people off, bribe enough colleges to teach it, integrate it so
    tight AS THEY DID IN OUTLOOK.

    What interest do you or I have in VBScrap? None. If someone wants to make
    nonportable proprietary code in web pages, forget them. If someone wants
    to code virii and promiscious code into email, dont forget them, remember
    how stupid MS was to put VBasic into their **** emailer.

    Let the buyer beware. (C.E.)

    Billyboy

    "In a world without doors or fences, who needs Windows or Gates?" - source
    unknown






  2. #2
    Dumbo Guest

    Re: A dose of reality


    You sure do have neato little tags like Microshaft and vbscrap. Neat. I'll
    bet you code in servletts and beans, huh. Jesus.

  3. #3
    Shawn K. Hall Guest

    Re: A dose of reality


    <Billyboy Fences (unposted)> wrote in message
    news:391a538f$1@news.devx.com...

    > Surrrrreeeee, what if MS owned the most popular scripting engine on

    the web,
    > from both the client and server sides? It would be simple to then

    introduce
    > a 'superscript server engine' that cost $15,000/server and a

    development
    > program that cost $5000/license. They just simply put bets on all

    horses.

    I'm sorry? For a minute I thought you were talking about Microsoft,
    then you started talking about *Sun*.

    > The chances may have been 1 in 10 but VB script might have won if

    they could
    > pay enough people off, bribe enough colleges to teach it, integrate

    it so
    > tight AS THEY DID IN OUTLOOK.


    VBScript is *not* integrated into Outlook. It is integrated into the
    operating system. Outlook simply makes good use of the OS. There is no
    need to bribe anyone to teach it - it lends very well to teaching
    itself. That's what having something like VBScript/VBA/VB so
    conveniently similar to each other can accomplish.

    > What interest do you or I have in VBScrap? None. If someone wants

    to make
    > nonportable proprietary code in web pages, forget them.


    Why? Why can't anything be sacred anymore? Why can't I code with a
    proprietary tool on an OS that doesn't have it's source available for
    free at every nickel and dime store? What do you lunatics have against
    *a* business model (*any* business model)? What have you got to lose?
    I'll tell you what, (assuming you're a developer) you'd enjoy life
    much less if every piece of software that was ever sold was available
    with free source for download; everything you ever could conceive of
    working for someone else for was being given away for free. Of course,
    I guess there's always banner ads, right?

    > If someone wants
    > to code virii and promiscious code into email, dont forget them,

    remember
    > how stupid MS was to put VBasic into their **** emailer.


    Yeah I'd hate to easily be able to extend a product I use regularly.
    They should take keyboard and mouse support from windows too while
    they're at it. Pesky input devices. Hey, you know what would be really
    neat? How about an email client that didn't even download email!

    > Let the buyer beware. (C.E.)
    >
    > Billyboy



    Where's that cluestick when you need it?


    Shawn K. Hall
    Programmer / Analyst
    *Please* post/respond in the newsgroups!
    http://i.am/shawnkhall






  4. #4
    unlisted Guest

    Re: A dose of reality


    "Shawn K. Hall" <shawnkhall@iname.com> wrote:
    >
    ><Billyboy Fences (unposted)> wrote in message
    >news:391a538f$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    >> Surrrrreeeee, what if MS owned the most popular scripting engine on

    >the web,
    >> from both the client and server sides? It would be simple to then

    >introduce
    >> a 'superscript server engine' that cost $15,000/server and a

    >development
    >> program that cost $5000/license. They just simply put bets on all

    >horses.
    >
    >I'm sorry? For a minute I thought you were talking about Microsoft,
    >then you started talking about *Sun*.
    >


    Good morning, Sir. I wasn't talking about Sun. I couldnt give a **** about
    companies like Microsoft or about Sun even who are interested in developing
    proprietary encapsulated code. Good morning! Sun may have plans for Java,
    and I dont say Java is the best implementation, but VBscript is ENTIRELY
    proprietary.



    >> The chances may have been 1 in 10 but VB script might have won if

    >they could
    >> pay enough people off, bribe enough colleges to teach it, integrate

    >it so
    >> tight AS THEY DID IN OUTLOOK.

    >
    >VBScript is *not* integrated into Outlook. It is integrated into the
    >operating system. Outlook simply makes good use of the OS. There is no
    >need to bribe anyone to teach it - it lends very well to teaching
    >itself. That's what having something like VBScript/VBA/VB so
    >conveniently similar to each other can accomplish.
    >


    So that shows you what happens when a business monopoly exists and they dont
    even need to rely on their product, just rely on MY BROTHERS operating system
    that has it built into the majority of peoples OS's, even though they never
    asked for it, and in many cases of corporate deployment, never included this
    into their plans.

    >> What interest do you or I have in VBScrap? None. If someone wants

    >to make
    >> nonportable proprietary code in web pages, forget them.

    >



    >Why? Why can't anything be sacred anymore? Why can't I code with a
    >proprietary tool on an OS that doesn't have it's source available for
    >free at every nickel and dime store? What do you lunatics have against
    >*a* business model (*any* business model)? What have you got to lose?
    >I'll tell you what, (assuming you're a developer) you'd enjoy life
    >much less if every piece of software that was ever sold was available
    >with free source for download; everything you ever could conceive of
    >working for someone else for was being given away for free. Of course,


    >I guess there's always banner ads, right?
    >


    You can, but if you plan on making money on the internet, you may find that
    people dont want to download potentially dangerious plugins, or modules which
    are entirely up to the loose scrutiny of companies of MS (do they care?).


    I see that you reduce the usability of portable code to banner ads.

    Im sorry that you are angry that a consortium develops language standards
    "for free". Perhaps we should all be charged to the account of "the King"
    for writing in this forum in English.

    In todays world, there is always a need for programmers of talent, and people
    who develop custom solutions.

    If anyone thinks that the web of integrated garbage spewing machines of MS
    has benefited anything besides their exaggerated paychecks for time solving
    obfusificating problems, I feel very sorry.

    Personally I recommend you get into the business of Microsoft Active-X electronic
    Programmable Toilets of you think thats fun. Perhaps your boss will sympathize
    on the sway people like you put on avoiding X-10 compatable toilets and use
    VB toilets instead. However I wont fail to laugh when somebody puts a virus
    in your **** toilet because you didnt listen to people who designed failsafe
    systems before you were even born.


    >> If someone wants
    >> to code virii and promiscious code into email, dont forget them,

    >remember
    >> how stupid MS was to put VBasic into their **** emailer.

    >


    >Yeah I'd hate to easily be able to extend a product I use regularly.
    >They should take keyboard and mouse support from windows too while
    >they're at it. Pesky input devices. Hey, you know what would be really
    >neat? How about an email client that didn't even download email!
    >


    Could you please explain how you could extend a freaking emailer? Mail is
    a delivery system. Established and tested methods of email dictate that
    MIME objects can extend this functionality. However they can lead to objects
    that are propriatary like VB scripts. Compare VB scripts and other mysterious
    attachments to letterbombs. An expert sees them, and takes appropriate action.
    A novice opens them eagerly expecting something from their grandmother,
    and dies. Lets not cloud the point with speak of "I didnt fall for it".
    Because its novices that fall for tricks.



    >> Let the buyer beware. (C.E.)
    >>
    >> Billyboy

    >
    >
    >Where's that cluestick when you need it?
    >
    >



    Where are experienced people in this industry when you need it? If you lost
    your clue-stick, i suggest you get up from your chair and see where it might
    be (put politely).


    >Shawn K. Hall
    >Programmer / Analyst
    >*Please* post/respond in the newsgroups!
    >http://i.am/shawnkhall
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >



  5. #5
    Shawn K. Hall Guest

    Re: A dose of reality


    <Billyboy Fences (unlisted)> wrote in message
    news:391a65c4$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > [snip] but VBscript is ENTIRELY proprietary.


    So? Who says I want to develop for every platform? Why should I code a
    solution in another language that may be more "portable" if it can't
    be delivered within the timeframe my customer needs it, and if my
    customer only needs it for a single platform? Why should I have to
    write something in JS or Java that only needs to run on the server
    (which can be guaranteed to be NT)? If I'm marketing a product to a
    specific group (marketing means I can actually focus on a specific
    subset of people that might have a certain need that I can fulfill),
    why should I waste time and effort to write a multi-platform product?
    Shouldn't the *need* determine the language for the product, not the
    obsessive-compulsive-anti-microsoft-zealot-with-a-chip-on-his-shoulder
    -because-he-got-shafted-by-a-virus-that-was-obviously-so just mandate
    *it must be open-source-multi-platform*?

    You name ONE program that really is "write once, run anywhere" that
    doesn't require OS specific runtimes. I'd really like to check it out.

    > >Outlook simply makes good use of the OS. There is no
    > >need to bribe anyone to teach it - it lends very well to teaching
    > >itself. That's what having something like VBScript/VBA/VB so
    > >conveniently similar to each other can accomplish.

    >
    > So that shows you what happens when a business monopoly exists and

    they dont
    > even need to rely on their product, just rely on MY BROTHERS

    operating system
    > that has it built into the majority of peoples OS's, even though

    they never
    > asked for it, and in many cases of corporate deployment, never

    included this
    > into their plans.


    Outlook was pretty obviously written for Windows. Surprise, surprise.
    Many apps are. You see, we have DLLs, things like the API and COM: the
    ability to have callable code within the OS that we don't have to make
    up ourselves. Why recreate the wheel? The idea is, if it's *in* the
    OS, it's not something you'll have to waste your time with.

    I use [Windows] API calls in every app I write. If that's "depending
    on my brothers software" then you're out of touch with development for
    the '90's.

    > >I guess there's always banner ads, right?

    >
    > You can, but if you plan on making money on the internet, you may

    find that
    > people dont want to download potentially dangerious plugins, or

    modules which
    > are entirely up to the loose scrutiny of companies of MS (do they

    care?).

    Who said anything about plugins? I'm talking serverside technologies
    on a wintel platform. Not everyone has to write *content* to make
    money. Some of us are developers, which means we develop (or extend)
    the delivery mechanisms so that "content" can reach the most people. I
    prefer sites that have no client-side scripting whatsoever, no activex
    controls, no plugins and no java applets, and don't even try to feed
    me some proprietary document type (like Word or PDF). If the content
    really matters, it will speak for itself. Every computer out there
    (and most alternative connection devices) should be able to parse the
    basic standards set forth by W3C, whether or not the standard is
    "agreeable" with their cause.

    > I see that you reduce the usability of portable code to banner ads.
    >
    > Im sorry that you are angry that a consortium develops language

    standards
    > "for free". Perhaps we should all be charged to the account of "the

    King"
    > for writing in this forum in English.


    That "for free" is not as "for free" as you may think. It is funded by
    investors with their own interests at heart. Yeah, sure, it would be
    great to be able to think of the w3c as the human rights league, but
    it isn't. They've come out with some great specs, and I'm not
    complaining about any of them - but they were all created to further
    private technologies reach - you know "embrace and extend". There's
    nothing wrong with the process, just don't be deceived into thinking
    it's all for you. It's for the investors.

    > >> If someone wants
    > >> to code virii and promiscious code into email, dont forget them,

    > >remember
    > >> how stupid MS was to put VBasic into their **** emailer.

    >
    > >Yeah I'd hate to easily be able to extend a product I use

    regularly.
    > >They should take keyboard and mouse support from windows too while
    > >they're at it. Pesky input devices. Hey, you know what would be

    really
    > >neat? How about an email client that didn't even download email!

    >
    > Could you please explain how you could extend a freaking emailer?

    Mail is
    > a delivery system. Established and tested methods of email dictate

    that
    > MIME objects can extend this functionality. However they can lead

    to objects
    > that are propriatary like VB scripts. Compare VB scripts and other

    mysterious
    > attachments to letterbombs. An expert sees them, and takes

    appropriate action.
    > A novice opens them eagerly expecting something from their

    grandmother,
    > and dies. Lets not cloud the point with speak of "I didnt fall for

    it".
    > Because its novices that fall for tricks.


    Yes, mail is a delivery system. How about an address book? Wouldn't it
    be awesome to be able to have a list of addresses readily available
    when you need to email someone? And as long as you put that in there,
    how about having the email address autocomplete so that you don't have
    to remember someone's complete email address? Hey, as long as we're
    doing that, why not add a scheduling component to the address book so
    it can all be in one spot. And we'll add some tracking features - like
    *storing* email!! Hey, why don't we add newsgroups and faxing to it so
    that they can have all of their messaging in the same application! How
    about a "group" so I can send the same email to several people without
    having to remember that Bob is on the development team, and Mary
    wanted copies. Wow, these are some great idea's - I hope someone with
    more time than me can write some software like this, because I have to
    type every address in individually into my corporate mailing list of
    some 5000 employees...you know what else would be great - if I could
    send out the annual medical options cafeteria information sheet to
    everyone in email, and have them be able to respond within the email
    via a HTML-based form and have it automatically get collected by an
    automated email address and added to the personnel database...

    It's all bloat right?

    ( and then billyboy responds about how *most* customers don't "need"
    or "want" it and that it's just garbage to begin with because it
    doesn't run on every system out there....I just have difficulty
    telling if it's Linux Envy or if he just caught a love bug on his own
    computer )

    There are a lot of "typical consumers" out there that don't know the
    difference between a mouse and a modem. But the majority of customers
    extend their capabilities and pc usage over time. They don't just veg
    out on solitaire forever.

    It *would* be nice to have the security options in Win9x that you have
    in NT, and more. It would be nice to be able to disable specific calls
    made to any object within your system policies. It's not going to
    happen anytime soon, but security is becoming more important to MS,
    and I think they've demonstrated that pretty well with Win2K.

    Just because *you* can't figure out how to write code in vbscript, or
    conceive of any possible usefulness of the language does not mean it
    doesn't have merits.

    Shawn K. Hall
    Programmer / Analyst
    *Please* post/respond in the newsgroups!
    http://i.am/shawnkhall



  6. #6
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: A dose of reality

    > VBScript is worthless, and I don't pity people who bit
    > Microshaft's fishhook in the first place to use it.


    Billyboy: Windows Scripting Host supports JavaScript and Perl as well. The
    ILOVEYOU virus could just as easily have been written in one of those
    cross-platform languages; the fact that the perpetrator chose to use
    VBScript is irrelevant.
    ---
    Phil Weber



  7. #7
    Chad Mello Guest

    Re: A dose of reality



    You can please some of the people all of the time, all of the people some
    of the time, but NEVER ALL of the people ALL of the time.


  8. #8
    some Guest

    Re: A dose of reality


    "Phil Weber" <pweber@teleport.com> wrote:
    > > VBScript is worthless, and I don't pity people who bit
    > > Microshaft's fishhook in the first place to use it.

    >
    >Billyboy: Windows Scripting Host supports JavaScript and Perl as well. The
    >ILOVEYOU virus could just as easily have been written in one of those
    >cross-platform languages; the fact that the perpetrator chose to use
    >VBScript is irrelevant.
    >---
    >Phil Weber
    >
    >


    Its true, scripts may be written in Visual Basic, or in Java (which I might
    laughingly note is purposely incompliant with any and all other implementations
    of Java).

    I've read (believe it or not) a number of arguments which support this type
    of scripting. In general, all "extensions" of a platform or a programming
    language are great! However, if you have a major in history and a minor
    in programming, so to speak (sarcarsically) you would realize how this all
    came about. I wont pretend you agree with my version of it either, because
    if you wrote this article, you obviously dont know the history.

    1 bc ) Microsoft is happily constructing Visual Basic, no problems.

    3 ad ) Microsoft imagines Visual Basic and its RAD tools dominate the market
    for OS specific programs, because "it works" and "its easy".

    3.5 ad) A Java conference upsets officials at Microsoft. Planned dominance
    is threatened.

    3.75 ad) Microsoft begins agressively marketing their scripting tools and
    denying the fact that Java exists as a viable tool.

    4.00 ad) Microsoft decides to mock Java, and at the same time develop a
    proprietary version themselves.

    4.03 ad) Microsoft releases their first versions of Java, and simutaneously
    their own proprietary browser technologies that employ these extensions.
    Also Visual Basic scripting is equally included, at a great effort.

    4.04 ad) The net community is outraged at MS Explorers free distribution
    of a product, in order to put not one, but all other competitors out of business.

    4.05 ad- present)

    Im sure even the most dense of the readers of this forum can follow along.
    MS not only attempted to dominate the browser market, but push along their
    own versions of java, push along the visual basic related scripting (which
    nobody wanted in the first place unless they already relyed in Microsoft
    or bent over before bed), and gee, they also tied the entire MSOffice product
    to this internal wiregoop. Besides, why not incorporate it into the OS it
    self, not to mention the mailer. Are there any more questions, kids? Microsoft
    shoved these changes down your throat. If a 16 year old kid in cannibal
    island mocks your own argument, you'd better be willing to come up with some
    hard and fast explanations if you work for me.

    In sarcastic form, I would reccomend that we all train our secretaries in
    attachment fear. Lets explain to everyone in our company that email isnt
    a tool of exchange, its a penis in everyones face, which cant be aquainted
    with, without a condom and safe practices. In my organization, nothing like
    this would ever happen, because we are all lectured by Sir Sh. and company
    to be careful.

    Give me a break, if programmers make it programmers break it. Dont try to
    blame Sally the Secretary for ****ing up your system. This thread, and this
    article (bless the author) has opened up a whole world of how dense the overpraised
    children programmers (and anal-ists) can be. Welcome to the real world,
    kids. If you think you can design on the fly, and take a quick buck, be
    prepared to face consequences tomorrow.

    P.S. anyone of that school ever tried versioning a program far back as WIN
    3.11?

    BillyBoy, Proponent for Microsoft Illusion



  9. #9
    Chad Mello Guest

    Re: A dose of reality


    Old Billyboy :

    You fail to make a winning argument here because it is all too evident that
    your strong bias against Microsoft makes it impossible to interject an objective
    (even useful) opinion on this topic. Insulting the participants of this
    forum also reveals immaturity, crassness and ignorance. I don't blame you
    for not using your real name. If I were as simple minded as you, I wouldn't
    want the world to know either!

    You also failed to stay on track. Your original point was “…VBScript is
    worthless, and I dont pity people who bit Microshaft's fishhook in the first
    place to use it…” Your statement attacking VBScript’s worthiness cannot
    be justified by pointing out the marketing tactics used by Microsoft to introduce
    it. These are two, distinctly different topics with no relevance to one
    another. Maybe you should find some “kids” to preach to because the adults
    here are marveling over the fact that someone armed with nothing can assert
    himself so boldly. As far as I’m concerned the content of your interjection
    is of no use.
    I suggest that you wait until you grow up before making any more “contributions”
    to these discussions.

    Chad



  10. #10
    ToneDeF Guest

    Re: A dose of reality


    This bickering about whose technology better is pointless. ASP's w/ VBScript
    & ActiveX perform just as well as JSP's w/ Java & Java Beans. I think that
    a software developer should try to be proficient in whatever technology provides
    him/her with a working solution for the targeted platform.

    It seems to me that the real root of the argument here is a bias for or against
    Micro$oft. I do have quite a strong opinion in regards to this (I think
    that I liked the company better when it was merely a developer of operating
    systems and APIs, but it has since become a behemoth-sized software tyrant).
    Unfortunately, I do not have enough time to type up my $0.02 (perhaps I
    shouldn't have skipped that typing class back in high school), nor do I have
    the time to compose all my thoughts together into a cohesive, convincing
    article. I'm amazed that I took a few moments to post a comment at all!

  11. #11
    James Curran Guest

    Re: A dose of reality

    <Old Billyboy (some)> wrote in message news:391d0ad4$1@news.devx.com...
    > Its true, scripts may be written in Visual Basic, or in Java (which I

    might
    > laughingly note is purposely incompliant with any and all other

    implementations
    > of Java).


    First of all, you message largely confuses JavaScript and Java. The two
    have nothing in common, and the fact that they have similar names is the
    result of a backroom deal (that is, a scam) perpetrated by Netscape & Sun.

    JScript, the implementation of JavaScript that comes with Windows, is
    fully compliant to the ECMA standard for the language. Microsoft was
    compliant to that standard long before Netscape's implementation was.
    (Discrepancies occurred because Netscape merely documented it's bugs, ECMA's
    specification wanted them fixed)

    Further, Microsoft implementation of Java is fully compliant to the
    "standard" specified by Sun at the time the contract was signed. It was
    only afterwards that Sun decided to deliberately change it's
    specification --- in ways it *knew* would break Microsoft implementation.
    (Sun claims it can do this -- and "standard" rendered in quotes above --
    because Java is a completely closed & proprietary language owned entirely by
    Sun. There is no "standard" for Java, merely Sun's whim......)

    What you seem to be blind to is Sun's attempt at dominate the entire
    computer market via Java. Their plans are actually far more evil than
    Microsoft's, but were prevented, largely due to Sun's own incompetence.

    The rest of your message is nonsense.... "No one wanted scripting"?
    Having people been crying since DOS 1.0 for better batch files? What about
    all those (really bad) scripting languages for Windows that came before
    VBScript? What about all those scripting language for UNIX and Macs?

    "If a 16 year old kid in cannibal island mocks your own argument, you'd
    better be willing to come up with some hard and fast explanations if you
    work for me." Ignoring racist remarks about the Philippines, the fact
    remains that I could write a similar virus for the Mac in about a day, using
    no Microsoft products. It wouldn't spread very far because hardly anyone in
    my address lists use Macs, and the few that do, probably aren't using the
    email package I'd script the virus for, but that merely proves that Windows
    is very popular... and that's hardly a design flaw. (I give myself a full
    day to wrote the virus, because first, I'd have to teach myself AppleScript)

    --
    Truth,
    James Curran
    http://www.NJTheater.com
    http://www.NJTheater.com/JamesCurran






    >
    > I've read (believe it or not) a number of arguments which support this

    type
    > of scripting. In general, all "extensions" of a platform or a programming
    > language are great! However, if you have a major in history and a minor
    > in programming, so to speak (sarcarsically) you would realize how this all
    > came about. I wont pretend you agree with my version of it either,

    because
    > if you wrote this article, you obviously dont know the history.
    >
    > 1 bc ) Microsoft is happily constructing Visual Basic, no problems.
    >
    > 3 ad ) Microsoft imagines Visual Basic and its RAD tools dominate the

    market
    > for OS specific programs, because "it works" and "its easy".
    >
    > 3.5 ad) A Java conference upsets officials at Microsoft. Planned

    dominance
    > is threatened.
    >
    > 3.75 ad) Microsoft begins agressively marketing their scripting tools and
    > denying the fact that Java exists as a viable tool.
    >
    > 4.00 ad) Microsoft decides to mock Java, and at the same time develop a
    > proprietary version themselves.
    >
    > 4.03 ad) Microsoft releases their first versions of Java, and

    simutaneously
    > their own proprietary browser technologies that employ these extensions.
    > Also Visual Basic scripting is equally included, at a great effort.
    >
    > 4.04 ad) The net community is outraged at MS Explorers free distribution
    > of a product, in order to put not one, but all other competitors out of

    business.
    >
    > 4.05 ad- present)
    >
    > Im sure even the most dense of the readers of this forum can follow along.
    > MS not only attempted to dominate the browser market, but push along

    their
    > own versions of java, push along the visual basic related scripting (which
    > nobody wanted in the first place unless they already relyed in Microsoft
    > or bent over before bed), and gee, they also tied the entire MSOffice

    product
    > to this internal wiregoop. Besides, why not incorporate it into the OS it
    > self, not to mention the mailer. Are there any more questions, kids?

    Microsoft
    > shoved these changes down your throat. If a 16 year old kid in cannibal
    > island mocks your own argument, you'd better be willing to come up with

    some
    > hard and fast explanations if you work for me.
    >
    > In sarcastic form, I would reccomend that we all train our secretaries in
    > attachment fear. Lets explain to everyone in our company that email isnt
    > a tool of exchange, its a penis in everyones face, which cant be aquainted
    > with, without a condom and safe practices. In my organization, nothing

    like
    > this would ever happen, because we are all lectured by Sir Sh. and

    company
    > to be careful.
    >
    > Give me a break, if programmers make it programmers break it. Dont try to
    > blame Sally the Secretary for ****ing up your system. This thread, and

    this
    > article (bless the author) has opened up a whole world of how dense the

    overpraised
    > children programmers (and anal-ists) can be. Welcome to the real world,
    > kids. If you think you can design on the fly, and take a quick buck, be
    > prepared to face consequences tomorrow.
    >
    > P.S. anyone of that school ever tried versioning a program far back as WIN
    > 3.11?
    >
    > BillyBoy, Proponent for Microsoft Illusion
    >
    >




  12. #12
    James Curran Guest

    Re: A dose of reality

    "ToneDeF" <ToneDeF@HoTMaiL.com> wrote in message
    news:3922a1f0$1@news.devx.com...
    >(I think
    > that I liked the company better when it was merely a developer of

    operating
    > systems and APIs, but it has since become a behemoth-sized software

    tyrant).

    Actually, MSFT started writing applications, then moved to development
    tools, and then into operating systems....

    --
    Truth,
    James Curran
    http://www.NJTheater.com
    http://www.NJTheater.com/JamesCurran






  13. #13
    Robert Scoble Guest

    Re: A dose of reality

    > Actually, MSFT started writing applications, then moved to development
    > tools, and then into operating systems....


    Um, a BASIC compiler was Gates' first product, methought.

    Robert Scoble

    ###



  14. #14
    James Curran Guest

    Re: A dose of reality

    "Robert Scoble" <rscoble@fawcette.com> wrote in message
    news:392329be$1@news.devx.com...
    > > Actually, MSFT started writing applications, then moved to

    development
    > > tools, and then into operating systems....

    >
    > Um, a BASIC compiler was Gates' first product, methought.


    Actually, we both said it wrong..... Microsoft's first product was a
    BASIC (although I think the first version was an interpreter). However,
    before he started using the Microsoft name, Gates was writing applications
    (remember Traf-O-Data?)

    --
    Truth,
    James Curran
    http://www.NJTheater.com
    http://www.NJTheater.com/JamesCurran






Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center