.NET equals Efficiency

[Larry Serflaten]

"Mike Mitchell" <kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk> wrote
>
> I think you are unfairly attacking the messenger

Can you name any group of people that enjoy incessant nagging?
If you can, why don't you all go there, and stop posting your
faultfinding here.

There is a huge difference between bringing a message, and constantly
flaunting pessimistic opinions, and in this case, irrelavent sexually explicit
advertisements.. Perhaps you can't see it, they have long stopped opposing
the messages that have merit, and are now being offended by the messengers
who are adding nothing but FUD.

LFS

[Robert Lantry]

--
Robert
---
The more important your cheese is to you the more you want to hold on to it.
http://www.whomovedmycheese.com

"Mike Mitchell" <kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c7fb2f3.4426445@news.devx.com...
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 07:37:24 -0700, "Kathleen Dollard"
> <kathleen@mvps.org> wrote:
>
> >I agree, it is annoying that you continue to waste bandwidth on an
> >advertisement in your sig that is irrelevant to all and offensive to
some.
> >That you insist on a focus on your irrelevant endeavours says a great
deal
> >aobut you.
>
> I think you are unfairly attacking the messenger because his message
> doesn't accord with the .Net evangelism which is rife in this ng.
>This
> seems to be a pronounced symptom of .Net zealotry, which no one can
> fail to notice. It's almost as if you're all afraid of criticism!
>
> MM

Bah. How about this instead: We're annoyed by wallys like you and Bill
using this forum on .NET discussions as your personal platform to :

a) Attack .NET, when neither of you use it or even understand it.
b) Attack Microsoft and their products because you disagree with their
company policies.
c) Post massively inaccurate garbage and FUD and play semantic games to
further your a) and b) goals.
d) Whine about "zealotry" when you're caught being hypocrites.

I'll point out again, in case you think we forgot, your spew is the same
spew from 6 years ago and you still haven't learned anything. You think
Delphi is hot stuff, but you've obviously never used it, since it's called
"object pascal" for a reason. You think Kylix is cool, but you don't know
what it is. To sum, there is NOTHING you have to contribute to the
discussion of .NET. Install it some day and figure out how to use it and
then come back and tell us what's wrong with it. Until then you don't even
rank as a .NOTer. You're just a cretin with an axe to grind.

[Randy Jackson]

"Robert Lantry" <mirth@mirthy.com> wrote in message
news:3c7fb6f5$1@10.1.10.29...

> The more important your cheese is to you the more you want to hold on to
it.
> http://www.whomovedmycheese.com

Mike's cheese is getting moldy.

--
RJ

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:14:14 -0600, "Jacob Grass"
<JGrass@AbilitiSolutions.com> wrote:

>Wow, Mike, you are so right. . . Dr. Bill is the VB Messiah. I'd probably
>be kissing his *** too if both your heads weren't in the way. . .

Thanks for that, Jacob! You make my case for me. Brilliantly argued.
Ta, muchly.

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:25:34 -0600, "Larry Serflaten"
<serflaten@usinternet.com> wrote:

>Can you name any group of people that enjoy incessant nagging?
>If you can, why don't you all go there, and stop posting your
>faultfinding here.

And here's another, overtaking Jacob on the inside lane...

Faultfinding, criticism -- it's all too much for precious .Net
aficionados to tolerate, is it? What would you do without us? You
wouldn't *have* any critics at all, and then where would you be? So
much bending over, so little time...

MM

[Jacob Grass]

> Thanks for that, Jacob! You make my case for me. Brilliantly argued.
> Ta, muchly.

Glad me knee-jerk reaction was helpful <g>


--
Jacob Grass

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 09:26:32 -0800, "Robert Lantry" <mirth@mirthy.com>
wrote:

>Bah. How about this instead: We're annoyed by wallys like you and Bill
>using this forum on .NET discussions as your personal platform to :
>
>a) Attack .NET, when neither of you use it or even understand it.

Well, it's specifically VB.Net I'm (not) interested in, as it directly
affects me as a classic VB programmer. The fact that .Net likes to
come along for the ride as a host for the mandatory framework in which
to run VB.Net "apps" kind of just adds to the cauldron.

>b) Attack Microsoft and their products because you disagree with their
>company policies.

What? Disagreement is not allowed here? It's a vb.dotnet.discussion
group, talking about VB.Net as the product which has killed off real
Visual Basic and you don't expect criticism? You just want us all to
roll over and accept everything without a peep? By some of us
continually harping on here and elsewhere about the massive betrayal
that has been committed upon three million and more totally innocent
and ten-years-loyal 70% non-class-writing classic VB programmers, you,
hopefully, will pass on the message to anyone in the MS camp to the
effect that "the injuns are revolting, cap'n". This is how things get
changed. Maybe not this time, but you can be as sure as **** is hot
that they will think a little bit longer the next time they come up
with a similar hairbrained scheme which screws over some of their best
customers. May even be YOU in a few years' time! Think about that.
Think about how much whining versus rolling over, you're going to be
prepared to do if and when the time comes.

>c) Post massively inaccurate garbage and FUD and play semantic games to
>further your a) and b) goals.

I don't know what you mean with "semantic games". The semantics of
this escape me, sorry.

>d) Whine about "zealotry" when you're caught being hypocrites.

Hypocrites how so?

>I'll point out again, in case you think we forgot, your spew is the same
>spew from 6 years ago and you still haven't learned anything. You think
>Delphi is hot stuff, but you've obviously never used it, since it's called
>"object pascal" for a reason.

Yes, I have.

> You think Kylix is cool, but you don't know
>what it is.

Yes, I do. I have the Desktop Developer edition sitting on a hard disk
in the next room.

> To sum, there is NOTHING you have to contribute to the
>discussion of .NET. Install it some day and figure out how to use it and
>then come back and tell us what's wrong with it. Until then you don't even
>rank as a .NOTer. You're just a cretin with an axe to grind.

I think giving an axe to a cretin is like abusing the disabled.

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 09:27:32 -0800, "Randy Jackson"
<RJacksonAPC@Yahoo.com> wrote:

>Mike's cheese is getting moldy.

Not the kind I like which comes in tubes flavoured with shrimp.

MM

[Jacob Grass]

> Glad me knee-jerk reaction was helpful <g>
> ^^^

Ahem. . . my . . .

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:17:31 -0600, "Jacob Grass"
<JGrass@AbilitiSolutions.com> wrote:

>> Glad me knee-jerk reaction was helpful <g>
>> ^^^
>
>Ahem. . . my . . .

No, no, young sir! You now qualify as an honorary Cockney!

MM

[Phil Weber]

> ...but you can be as sure as **** is hot...

Mike: Actually, it isn't, but that's definitely a subject for the off.ramp.
;-)

> Think about how much whining versus rolling over, you're
> going to be prepared to do if and when the time comes.

There will be no whining from me, under any circumstances.

Imagine, for example, that Microsoft announced its intention to completely
discontinue Visual Basic, once and for all. I would certainly be
disappointed -- I've been a VB programmer for almost 10 years, and an MS
BASIC programmer for nearly 25; BASIC was the first programming language I
learned, and remains the one with which I feel most comfortable -- but I
wouldn't whine about it. I would express my disappointment -- by e-mail and,
if possible, postal mail and telephone -- directly to those in a position to
change the situation. If it became clear that the decision was final, then I
would try to determine how to make the best of the situation, and move on.

That, in my opinion, is how adults deal with disappointment: they don't
throw tantrums hoping to annoy others into giving them their way; rather,
they try to make the best of the hand life has dealt them.
---
Phil Weber

[GregD.]

"Mike Mitchell" <kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c7fe959.18354083@news.devx.com...
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:25:34 -0600, "Larry Serflaten"
> <serflaten@usinternet.com> wrote:
>
<snip drivel>
> MM


*plonk*

[W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD]

In article <3c7ff795$1@10.1.10.29>,
"Phil Weber" <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> writes:

[...]

> Imagine, for example, that Microsoft announced its intention to
> completely discontinue Visual Basic, once and for all.

[...]

> I would express my disappointment -- by e-mail and, if possible,
> postal mail and telephone -- directly to those in a position to
> change the situation. If it became clear that the decision was
> final, then I would try to determine how to make the best of the
> situation, and move on.

> That, in my opinion, is how adults deal with disappointment: they
> don't throw tantrums hoping to annoy others into giving them their
> way; rather, they try to make the best of the hand life has dealt
> them.

No, that is the way "well behaved" children deal with adverse
decisions. Adults are aware that such decisions - *especially*
business decisions - are subject to reevaluation and revision. That
"because I/we said so" is not a final answer, and that the reasons
given for such decisions may not be - often aren't - the real reasons
for the decisions. And that a variety of targeted pressures (public
and private) are often effective in "encouraging" revision of such
decisions.

Such actions are most effective when targeted at the "real" reason(s)
for the decisions. But such reasons are not always obvious, and even
when they are fairly clear some people have difficulty accepting
them. Therefore, people targeting the underlying reasons are often
viewed as "off target" by those who bought into the superficial given
"reasons". OTOH, even "off target" public dissent can cause major
customers of the target company to reconsider their relationship with
that company. Especially when the dissent targets important issues of
those customers. Therefore, the most effective way to bring pressure
on the decision makers is often a variety of people taking a variety
of targeted actions. One part of that is making such dissent public
(to the relevant portions of the public) - something you characterize
as "whining". Another part is reiterating certain of the "downsides"
of the decision in places and ways which are likely to come to the
attention of "customer" decision makers - another thing you choose to
call "whining". Another is to focus attention on elements which are
detrimental to the strategy behind the decision (such as security
problems with a product bidding for dominance of a market segment
which deals with confidential information). Each of these steps may
seem individually ineffective. But cumulatively, when taken with other
steps not mentioned here, they can exert considerable pressure on
the decision makers in question.

Interestingly, one thing which often enhances the effectiveness of
such dissent is the response of the supporters of the decision. If the
supporters are seen as thoughtless and/or immature in that support -
responding emotionally, with "don't discuss this any more " demands,
name calling, rhetorical tricks, etc. - then "customer" decision
makers are more likely to take a hard look at any earlier tendency to
favor the position of those supporters.

Adults know all this (despite what many try to teach their children),
and use that knowledge to take effective action concerning decisions
we consider inappropriate. But feel free to continue acting like a
good child instead, if it pleases you to do so.

--

W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD

*-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*
* CHANGE YOUR SEXUALITY * http://www.nyx.net/~bgoodric/ctg.html *
* * *
* Without Aversive * ctgcentral@earthlink.net *
* Behavior Modification * Creative Technology Group *
* or Drugs * PO Box 286 *
* * Englewood, CO 80151-0286 *
*-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*

[Robert Lantry]

"W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:3C83A8C7.43CC1C4@netzero.net...
> In article <3c7ff795$1@10.1.10.29>,
> "Phil Weber" <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> writes:
<snip>
> Such actions are most effective when targeted at the "real" reason(s)
> for the decisions. But such reasons are not always obvious, and even
> when they are fairly clear some people have difficulty accepting
> them. Therefore, people targeting the underlying reasons are often
> viewed as "off target" by those who bought into the superficial given
> "reasons".

Amusing. You honestly think that Microsoft (let alone any rational client
in the universe) would consider your opinions credible about a new
development tool? Being that you consider OOP to be overly complex overhead
and you dont use it? Being that your experience is at least 10 years out of
date? Being that you don't use the product?



>OTOH, even "off target" public dissent can cause major
> customers of the target company to reconsider their relationship with
> that company.

This falls under the "If you want to talk yourself out of a job, go right
ahead..." category. Your ego is a thing to behold.

>Especially when the dissent targets important issues of
> those customers.

Which you can't directly address, since your experience is 10 years old and
you don't have any idea of what problems the tool actually can solve for the
client.

>Another part is reiterating certain of the "downsides"
> of the decision in places and ways which are likely to come to the
> attention of "customer" decision makers - another thing you choose to
> call "whining".

Actually, it isn't whining, it's fear, plain and simple.

>Another is to focus attention on elements which are
> detrimental to the strategy behind the decision (such as security
> problems with a product bidding for dominance of a market segment
> which deals with confidential information).

More amusement, since apps in .NET are about a bazillion times more secure
than VB6 alone ever was. This is called FUD. Using FUD to scare your
clients into thinking there's a problem when the fact is you're the one
experiencing fear, uncertainty and doubt. Classic projection, eh?

>Each of these steps may
> seem individually ineffective. But cumulatively, when taken with other
> steps not mentioned here, they can exert considerable pressure on
> the decision makers in question.
>
No, not really. If a credible source comes forward and says "The reason why
foo is a bad idea..." the decision maker in question can address it. But
"pressure" only comes inside of Microsoft in the form of the marketing
department. Marketing gathers up all the problems they're having selling
the product in question and then approaches the development team and
pressures them into making changes to make the product an easier sell. Or,
they get answers directly to the problems people are addressing: "People are
saying security is an issue. How do we address this?" or it might be a more
blunt proposal like: "People are saying security is an issue. Fix it!"

> Interestingly, one thing which often enhances the effectiveness of
> such dissent is the response of the supporters of the decision. If the
> supporters are seen as thoughtless and/or immature in that support -
> responding emotionally, with "don't discuss this any more " demands,
> name calling, rhetorical tricks, etc. - then "customer" decision
> makers are more likely to take a hard look at any earlier tendency to
> favor the position of those supporters.
>
Never met a MS evangelist, have you? They're five times scarier then
anything you've seen here and only 1/10th as knowledgable (okay, that was
editorializing, sorry).

> Adults know all this (despite what many try to teach their children),
> and use that knowledge to take effective action concerning decisions
> we consider inappropriate. But feel free to continue acting like a
> good child instead, if it pleases you to do so.

Again, your ego is such a wonderful thing to watch. Your condescenion,
arrogance...total lack of any knowledge of the universe outside
yourself...all wrapped into an incompetent package. Lovely.
The plus side is that in about 5 years time, you'll also be unemployed as a
developer and you and the rest of your willfully incompetent crowd will
slowly be degrading into petrol in a tar-pit somewhere.

Wow! That was fun.


> --
>
> W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD
>
> *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*
> * CHANGE YOUR SEXUALITY * http://www.nyx.net/~bgoodric/ctg.html *

I'd like to be a bi-sexual fetishist with a penchant for guava jelly who
gets turned on by high-heels and canoli. If you could throw in an
attraction to livestock then I wouldn't have to be so picky on the weekends.
-Thanks!

Robert
---
The more important your cheese is to you the more you want to hold on to it.
http://www.whomovedmycheese.com

[Mike Mitchell]

On Mon, 4 Mar 2002 10:00:54 -0800, "Robert Lantry" <mirth@mirthy.com>
wrote:

>The plus side is that in about 5 years time, you'll also be unemployed as a
>developer and you and the rest of your willfully incompetent crowd will
>slowly be degrading into petrol in a tar-pit somewhere.

This response exemplifies the ill-judged name-calling that
disinterested customers would take as a sign of weakness, thinking
"Why hasn't he got any reasoned argument?" . Once you start using
these kinds of personal abuses, Robert, you have lost the argument,
plain and simple.

MM