Debunking the Consistency Myth


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18

Thread: Debunking the Consistency Myth

  1. #1
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Debunking the Consistency Myth

    "Zane Thomas" <zane@mabry.com> wrote in message <news:3b2be107@news.devx.com>...

    > Patrick,
    >
    > > Yeah, especially if you want to learn something.

    >
    > It's been interesting to see that the most vehement - often fanatical -
    > opponents to vb.net here haven't even bothered to try the tool out to see
    > what it might have going for it. Joe and Mike are two of the most obvious
    > examples.
    >
    > It's going to be interesting to see what happens as .net is released and
    > gains acceptance - that is the most likely outcome at this point. While
    > people who could be getting up to speed, writing books and articles, and so
    > on are spending their time here ranting with silly little propaganda devices
    > such as vb.Nyet etc, there are dozens of authors who are stepping up to be
    > next year's experts, and who knows how many thousands of developers who are
    > working on .net products now.


    Has it really been so many years since others spewed pro-Delphi propaganda
    very similar to this, complete with "who knows how many" "dozens of authors"
    "next year's experts" and "thousands of developers"?

    > Joe and his ilk will either be eating some serious helpings of crow later,
    > or they will have to go find some obscure development niche where they can
    > grow old and bitter as the world leaves them behind.
    >
    > That's how things look from here.


    If someone else sees something else whilst standing somewhere else, is s/he
    necessarily in for a serious helping of what gets dished out here at DevX?
    Is only one point of view possible? Is this Rational?

    > Now Joe, this is where you insert your arrogant and insulting remarks -
    > hoping that I'll cancel them. Have fun, and don't forget to paint a huge
    > smile on your face before starting your act ok?


    Is this not the place for rants? If not, when did this change?

    "Technical questions belong in vb.dotnet.technical; rants belong here."
    -- Phil Weber, 2001-05-29, in news://news.devx.com/3b14149a@news.devx.com

    --
    Joe Foster <mailto:jfoster@ricochet.net> Sacrament R2.45 <http://www.xenu.net/>
    WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
    because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!



  2. #2
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    > Is this not the place for rants?

    Joe: It is, but not for personal attacks; those belong in the off.ramp. Zane
    didn't start asking you to go there until you started calling people
    "liars," etc.
    ---
    Phil Weber



  3. #3
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    Joe,

    >Has it really been so many years since others spewed pro-Delphi propaganda
    >very similar to this, complete with "who knows how many" "dozens of authors"
    >"next year's experts" and "thousands of developers"?


    Propaganda? Here's a fact: there are about 100 .net books in process
    right now; that qualifies as "dozens". I've also heard from a reliable
    source that Beta 2 will be shipped to 2 million developers - sounds like
    at least "thousands" to me.

    And if you want to see next year's experts you only have to read what Jeff
    Peil, Bill McCarthy, Kathleen Joeris, and many others here have to say.

    Keep your fingers in your ears, keeping stomping your feet, keep yelling
    ".NOT .NOT" all you want ... it won't make a hill of beans worth of
    difference Joe.

    So, what's it going to be for you? I'm curious. Are you going to go with
    ..NET or are you going to do something else?


    >If someone else sees something else whilst standing somewhere else, is s/he
    >necessarily in for a serious helping of what gets dished out here at DevX?


    Are you refering to the sorts of spin you consistently have tried to put
    on others' words here? Or maybe the sort of "liar, liar, pants on fire"
    juvenile rhetoric you've been engaged in? Is that what you're refering to
    Joe? I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to see you justify your
    actions given your constant attempts to find something to whine about
    here.


    ---
    Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

  4. #4
    Rich Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth


    "Joe \"Nuke Me Xemu\" Foster" <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote:

    >Has it really been so many years since others spewed pro-Delphi propaganda
    >very similar to this, complete with "who knows how many" "dozens of authors"
    >"next year's experts" and "thousands of developers"?


    You are comparing apples to oranges. Microsoft is not Borland. :-) Borland
    had a clear lack of vision; they released Delphi 4 years too late. If it
    was released four years earlier, who knows. It would have been an interesting
    battle.

    Microsoft, IMHO, has excellent vision with their development tools. Additionally,
    they have the marketing and developer relations to follow through. VB.NET
    is what I have been waiting for the last six years. No doubt, it will be
    a hit.

    Rich

  5. #5
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    "Phil Weber" <pweber@devx.com> wrote in message <news:3b2cee57$1@news.devx.com>...

    > > Is this not the place for rants?

    >
    > Joe: It is, but not for personal attacks; those belong in the off.ramp. Zane
    > didn't start asking you to go there until you started calling people
    > "liars," etc.


    Personal attacks such as news://news.devx.com/3b33ef43.41537968@news.devx.com
    and news://news.devx.com/3b2be107@news.devx.com perhaps? Why are you lying?
    Or are "personal attacks" locally redefined as "posts from Joe Foster"?

    --
    Joe Foster <mailto:jfoster@ricochet.net> DC8s in Spaace: <http://www.xenu.net/>
    WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
    because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!



  6. #6
    Who Cares Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    "Rich" <r@nohamnospam.com> wrote in message news:3b2d0081$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > You are comparing apples to oranges. Microsoft is not Borland. :-) Borland
    > had a clear lack of vision; they released Delphi 4 years too late.



    Delphi was officially released in Feb, 1995.
    Java was officially released in May, 1995.

    If anything, Java is more primitive than Delphi.


    > Microsoft, IMHO, has excellent vision with their development tools.



    Vision which is focused on Sun.




  7. #7
    Rich Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth


    Who Cares,

    I was not bashing Delphi. I find it to be better than most of the tools available.


    As for Sun, who cares? <g> Sun will continue on its merry way.


    Rich

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Who Cares" <venetian@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >"Rich" <r@nohamnospam.com> wrote in message news:3b2d0081$1@news.devx.com...
    >>
    >> You are comparing apples to oranges. Microsoft is not Borland. :-) Borland
    >> had a clear lack of vision; they released Delphi 4 years too late.

    >
    >
    > Delphi was officially released in Feb, 1995.
    > Java was officially released in May, 1995.
    >
    > If anything, Java is more primitive than Delphi.
    >
    >
    >> Microsoft, IMHO, has excellent vision with their development tools.

    >
    >
    > Vision which is focused on Sun.
    >
    >
    >



  8. #8
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    Joe,

    > Personal attacks such as

    news://news.devx.com/3b33ef43.41537968@news.devx.com
    > and news://news.devx.com/3b2be107@news.devx.com perhaps? Why are you

    lying?
    > Or are "personal attacks" locally redefined as "posts from Joe Foster"?


    Personal attacks? You're apparently feigning over-sensitivity as part of
    your continuing campaign to ... uh, what exactly is it you're trying to
    accomplish here Joe? One possibility is that you're trying to see what you
    have to do in order to get a post cancelled so that you can then complain
    about that having happened. Is that what you're doing here Joe, or do you
    have something remotely on-topic to talk about?

    There were no personal attacks in those posts, and certainly nothing which
    comes close to the "why are you lying?" sort of personal attack we see from
    you quoted above.

    So, once again, do you really want to have a post cancelled? If so, just
    say the word and I'll be happy to accomodate you. Go ahead Joe, ask for
    it, please.







  9. #9
    Who Cares Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth


    "Rich" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:3b2d0567$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > Who Cares,
    >
    > I was not bashing Delphi. I find it to be better than most of the tools

    available.

    You're making an incorrect statement. that Delphi
    "shipped four years too late".

    The shipping versions of Java and Delphi in 1995
    are worlds apart. In fact, several of Delphi's
    features have found their way into Java in
    the past three years.

    Delphi didn't ship too late. Borland didn't
    market it right, and MS killed it with
    monopoly power, just as they
    killed Novell 4.0 and WP
    with inferior products.

    > As for Sun, who cares?


    MS, for one. Apparently very much, since
    they're aiming everything at capturing the
    enterprise market now.

    > Rich
    >
    > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > "Who Cares" <venetian@earthlink.net> wrote:
    > >"Rich" <r@nohamnospam.com> wrote in message

    news:3b2d0081$1@news.devx.com...
    > >>
    > >> You are comparing apples to oranges. Microsoft is not Borland. :-)

    Borland
    > >> had a clear lack of vision; they released Delphi 4 years too late.

    > >
    > >
    > > Delphi was officially released in Feb, 1995.
    > > Java was officially released in May, 1995.
    > >
    > > If anything, Java is more primitive than Delphi.
    > >
    > >
    > >> Microsoft, IMHO, has excellent vision with their development tools.

    > >
    > >
    > > Vision which is focused on Sun.
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >




  10. #10
    Rich Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth


    Who Cares,

    I do not why you ramble on about Java. I never mentioned it.

    Like it or not, Delphi DID "ship" four years too late. If you do not believe
    it, ask any Borland employee the following, "If Delphi shipped at roughly
    the same time as VB, do you think Delphi would be more popular now?" Just
    about anyone with any knowledge of both tools would say yes. I'm surprised
    you cannot see that fact.

    VB was already the clear leader for four years. At that point, many people
    did not even care to look at the available options. VB already had a strong
    base.

    Finally, I'll give you a real example. When I was consulting at ____ ____,
    where C++ was developed, they were evaluating development tools for a vital
    project. The developer who performed the evaluations said, "I wish Delphi
    had gone gold before I made my recommendation." They ended up using VB and
    VC++.

    Rich
    __________________________________________________________________________






    "Who Cares" <venetian@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >
    >"Rich" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:3b2d0567$1@news.devx.com...
    >>
    >> Who Cares,
    >>
    >> I was not bashing Delphi. I find it to be better than most of the tools

    >available.
    >
    > You're making an incorrect statement. that Delphi
    > "shipped four years too late".
    >
    > The shipping versions of Java and Delphi in 1995
    > are worlds apart. In fact, several of Delphi's
    > features have found their way into Java in
    > the past three years.
    >
    > Delphi didn't ship too late. Borland didn't
    > market it right, and MS killed it with
    > monopoly power, just as they
    > killed Novell 4.0 and WP
    > with inferior products.
    >
    >> As for Sun, who cares?

    >
    > MS, for one. Apparently very much, since
    > they're aiming everything at capturing the
    > enterprise market now.
    >
    >> Rich
    >>
    >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >> "Who Cares" <venetian@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >> >"Rich" <r@nohamnospam.com> wrote in message

    >news:3b2d0081$1@news.devx.com...
    >> >>
    >> >> You are comparing apples to oranges. Microsoft is not Borland. :-)

    >Borland
    >> >> had a clear lack of vision; they released Delphi 4 years too late.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Delphi was officially released in Feb, 1995.
    >> > Java was officially released in May, 1995.
    >> >
    >> > If anything, Java is more primitive than Delphi.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >> Microsoft, IMHO, has excellent vision with their development tools.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Vision which is focused on Sun.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >

    >>

    >
    >



  11. #11
    Patrick Steele Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    In article <3b33ef43.41537968@news.devx.com> (from Zane Thomas
    <zane@mabry.com>),
    > So, what's it going to be for you? I'm curious. Are you going to go with
    > .NET or are you going to do something else?


    This one has to be answered -- please!

    I'd love to know why someone is spending so much time here in the VB.NET
    discussion group if they really don't believe in .NET (or Microsoft).
    I've seen a few interesting posts from Joe, but most of them are so
    clouded in FUD and sarcasm, I sometime's can't tell if he's even being
    serious.

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

  12. #12
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 21:42:44 -0400, Patrick Steele
    <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote:

    >> So, what's it going to be for you? I'm curious. Are you going to go with
    >> .NET or are you going to do something else?

    >
    >This one has to be answered -- please!


    That'd be nice, but it appears Joe's strategy is to avoid answering any
    questions to which he can't reply with something like "liar".


    ---
    Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

  13. #13
    Patrick Steele Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    In article <3b2eb826@news.devx.com> (from "Joe \"Nuke Me Xemu\" Foster"
    <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> <"Joe \"Nuke Me Xemu\" Foster" <joe@bftsi0.UUCP>>),
    > I wanted to Believe, really I did. "VB.NET" is about as close to Visual
    > Basic as QBasic was to ForTran. Only some of the keywords are the same.


    So, what option below would best describe your current position:

    a) I like the .NET direction and that's where I'm going
    b) I like the .NET direction, but I'll wait till version 1 to evaluate
    c) I don't like the .NET direction so I'm staying with classic VB
    d) I don't like the .NET direction and I'm currently evaluating other
    alternative development environments

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

  14. #14
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:31:45 -0700, "Joe \"Nuke Me Xemu\" Foster"
    <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote:

    >I wanted to Believe, really I did. "VB.NET" is ...


    Is? Since you've already posted about the fact that you haven't installed
    and used it, it's amusing to see you say otherwise.



    ---
    Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

  15. #15
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Re: Debunking the Consistency Myth

    "Zane Thomas" <zane@mabry.com> wrote in message <news:3b4f5074.136851375@news.devx.com>...

    > On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:31:45 -0700, "Joe \"Nuke Me Xemu\" Foster"
    > <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote:
    >
    > >I wanted to Believe, really I did. "VB.NET" is ...

    >
    > Is? Since you've already posted about the fact that you haven't installed
    > and used it, it's amusing to see you say otherwise.


    Is the VB.NET Beta 1 documentation at http://msdn.microsoft.com/ for all
    to see or isn't it? Are the new garbage collection and C-ish arrays mere
    disinformation, then? Have GoSub and Set not gone away, with nary a peep
    of proper deprecation? Has debug mode not lost significant functionality?

    --
    Joe Foster <mailto:jfoster@ricochet.net> "Regged" again? <http://www.xenu.net/>
    WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
    because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!



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