C-sharp demand on par with Assembler - Apache releases a Java app server (Re: Skills in most demand)

[Peter =?ISO-8859-15?Q?K=F6hlmann?=]

It seems that you missed the fact that the thread has been crossposted
to the MSFT public newsgroups where the terms of conduct apply. So
please don't include these groups when replying to the message. Thank
you!

Just my 2 Euro cents...

Seems you are about as smart as a typical MVP, that is, sligtly dumber than
a retarded brick. You are doing well in MS terms

Now pray tell, how should anyone divine how to answer you without actual
knowledge what groups *you* read? Is that an example of the superior MVP
reasoning skills?

 

[Raghar]

Guys ... this is really just noise in the
microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb and comp.lang.basic.visual.misc
groups - I really don't see how this or any of your previous postings
relate in any way to visual basic. Could you help improve the S/N
ratio and please drop the ms and basic groups for future
discussions/rants?

It was offtopic in Java.advocacy newsgroup so... If he crosposted to VB
and other groups, he probably has a reason. (I don't know what reason it
was however.)

 

[Play Taser Tag Now !]

Jeff Relf wrote:

The .NET development system sucks,
from what I've heard.

Let me put it this way. Given the way M$ is behaving with regard to its
obsolesced product lines -- I would venture to say that in the near
future the /only/ supported development on Windopes is going to be .NET

Anything that is not part of the assembly cache and managed will be
prevented from running.

You commented,
" You rant and rave about
code Compiling on each hardware device,
but when I casually mention that
Linux is compiled to the individual's hardware --
you turn and walk away. "

I agree, that's a fantastic feature of Linux.

But, just like you, my job requires Windows.

Ok. Then you really have no argument against Java then.

 

[Roedy Green]

Let me put it this way. Given the way M$ is behaving with regard to its
obsolesced product lines -- I would venture to say that in the near
future the /only/ supported development on Windopes is going to be .NET

the problem is MS makes more money if you change your tools. Then you
have to buy new ones, get more training etc. It is to their economic
disadvantage if you sit too comfortably.

On the other hand, every time they create abrupt change, they risk
losing customers faced with the prospect of a total rewrite anyway.

In the old days IBM used a strategy of making its customers
comfortable with obscenely obsolete code. It was impossible for any
smaller competitor to provide such a stable environment.

In an ideal world the change is more gradual and continuous.
Designers look far ahead and plan the transitions decades in advance.
Vendors provide tools to continuously and gradually upgrade code to
more portable forms.

 

[Play Taser Tag Now !]

the problem is MS makes more money if you change your tools. Then you
have to buy new ones, get more training etc. It is to their economic
disadvantage if you sit too comfortably.

The real problem for them is that they might make a tool that somebody
would use to create a viable application that could compete with their
Office products.

Why do you think they produce crappy, flawed IDEs and arcane languages?
The more they can keep developers off their trail -- the easier it is
for them to keep their monopoly.

Take VB: It's been around 10 years. Name me one application, written in
VB that has launched a company or business to success. ONE. JUST NAME
ONE. You can't can you.

Ok, take Visual c++ : Look at how long that was the mainstay of /real/
development. Then: Poof! Off it goes! Sorry boys, all that code you
wrote: well, its /unmanaged/ and we can't use it. Now you have to
write all your code in c#.

# of c# killer applications that have launched software companies: 0
# of vb.net killer applications that have launched software companies: 0
# of vb6 killer applications that have launched software companies: 0

On the other hand, every time they create abrupt change, they risk
losing customers faced with the prospect of a total rewrite anyway.

Or, as above, what they do is kill off potential competitors who may
have started getting really good at writing apps as good as Microsoft's

They basically have a love/hate relationship with developers. They want
developers to write for Windopes -- so it locks in the product, but they
/dont/ want them to write real applications that would challenge m$.

 

[OT]

It seems that you missed the fact that the thread has been crossposted
to the MSFT public newsgroups

It's clear you missed the fact that you're still crossposting.

where the terms of conduct apply.

Microsoft's "terms of conduct" apply solely on servers which are
Microsoft's property.

So please don't include these groups when replying to the message.

Did you believe Sir Bill of Gates created you Most Valuable Poster? Like
Microsoft dictating "terms of conduct", your opinion, a as crossposter,
is rendered irrelevant due to your "dirty hands".

 

[Jeff Relf]

Hi Play Taser Tag Now !,

You wrote,
" Take Visual C++ : Look at how long that was
the mainstay of Real development.
Then: Poof ! Off it goes ! Sorry boys,
all that code you wrote:
well, it's Unmanaged and we can't use it.
Now you have to write all your code in C-- . "

Who's saying that, and who is listening to them and why ?

C-- and Java are like fool's gold,
only lamers buy into it.

 

[Jeff Relf]

Hi Play Taser Tag Now !,

You wrote,
" Given the way M$ is behaving
with regard to its obsolesced product lines --
I would venture to say that in the near future
the Only supported development on Windopes
is going to be .NET

Anything that is not part of the assembly cache
and managed will be prevented from running. "

At least Microsoft provides Some support
for old programs and hardware...
it's not like Linuxes are doing a better job of that.
They don't even support each other.

I'm having no problems using an old Microsoft compiler,
CL.EXE, dated mid 1998, on Windows XP.

In ,
I asked how to get an updated Platform SDK,
including DirectX 9 and the MSDN documents
( gigabytes of data )
without spending a hundred dollars or more.
( My new Windows XP box only cost " me " 229 plus tax )

Heh, Wish me luck.

 

[Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz]

In the old days IBM used a strategy of making its customers
comfortable with obscenely obsolete code. It was impossible for any
smaller competitor to provide such a stable environment.

Huh? Burroughs/Unisys had no trouble providing MCP for decades,
GE/HoneyBULL had no trouble providing GCOS for decades, UNIVAC/Unisys
had no trouble providing EXEC 8 for decades, and the Unix community
never required buying new applications every other release. Micro$oft
seems to be unique in that regard.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to (e-mail address removed)

 

[Roedy Green]

Huh? Burroughs/Unisys had no trouble providing MCP for decades,

IBM went even further. You could hardware emulate 1410 autocoder
decades after the last real one left in a dumpster.