> First we can discount the genius stuff - it took the kid *3 years* after
> all.
> Second, if it took the kid *3 years*, then it's hardly a good ad for the
> tools.

The SQL Server implementation only took a few months, working mainly on
weekends. 3 years was the total time it took to go through the learning
curve. There were many projects along the way before the entire thing was
rolled into one.

> Third, the Unix experts weren't.

You missed the point. If an inexperienced kid could more or less master MS
tools in 3 years, and a bunch of people who calling themselves experts and
charging up to 200/hour couldn't get their project working, there has to be
a significant difference in difficulty level. Even if they weren't experts,
they had plenty of time to learn.

--
Jonathan Allen


"Andy Chevin" <yoshimura.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3a761167$1@news.devx.com...
> > If some kid who barely knows VB can build a fully functional enterprise
> > system in 3 years, while a dozen Unix experts can't keep a
less-functional
> > system running, there is only two possible conclusions. Either that kid
> was
> > a genius, or MS has done a **** good job with their tools so far.
>
> Only two conclusions?
>
> First we can discount the genius stuff - it took the kid *3 years* after
> all.
> Second, if it took the kid *3 years*, then it's hardly a good ad for the
> tools.
> Third, the Unix experts weren't.
> Fourth, they were laughing so hard at the amount of time it was taking the
> kid to
> get his system off the ground, they didn't have time to maintain their
> system.
>
> Andy.
>
> Oh yeah - there should be a coupla <g>s in there - I think.
>
>
>
>