Re: Microsoft's C++ bigotry
Mike Mitchell <email@example.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:02:24 -0600, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:
>>Do you think, having looked at the path MS provided for transition,
>>that these people really want a move that will (possibly/likely) set
>>them up for this situation again?
Who cares? The choice is move to Java or suck it up and learn a .Net language.
M$ ain't gonna go out of business because a few diehard VB 6 developers refuse
to learn a modern language. Most of the .NOT'ers aren't moving because they
have existing vertical application code. But those vertical applications
don't affect M$ income at all. VB 6 applications will progressively become
more and more outdated until they _have_ to be rewritten.
>And this is where Microsoft is really between a rock and a hard place.
>The less VB.Net is able to capture the enthusiasm of a considerable,
>significant band of brothers, happily coding away, the more likely it
>is that Microsoft will order the grim reaper to pay another visit.
>Well, the potential is there that even Microsoft would eventually have
>to throw in the towel, otherwise they'd have a lame dog product
>limping around after them into the future wherever they go. But in
>order for the above not to happen, they need to generate that
>enthusiasm! In the millions of programmers who have just had the rug
>pulled out from under. Not exactly the most trusting bunch of would-be
>converts, I'd guess.
.Net has already "captured the enthusiasm of a considerable, significant
band of brothers." Dont' be blinded just because they aren't the same set
of "brothers" who happily coded away in VB 6.
>I still say that the entire .Net thing is not needed. Whatever $ signs
>Bill might have on his eyeballs when he dreams at night with respect
>to web services and pay-by-the-minute, I just can't see how web
>services are taking off to any significant extent and, moreover, I
>reckon there are thousands of corporates for which web services will
>forever remain on someone's esoteric wish-list, i.e. could be nice,
>but we just don't need it.
You mean _you_ dont' need it. Others do.
Top DevX Stories
Easy Web Services with SQL Server 2005 HTTP Endpoints
JavaOne 2005: Java Platform Roadmap Focuses on Ease of Development, Sun Focuses on the "Free" in F.O.S.S.
Wed Yourself to UML with the Power of Associations
Microsoft to Add AJAX Capabilities to ASP.NET
IBM's Cloudscape Versus MySQL