Replies

We was the greater "we" as in "participants of the thread". And no I was desperately hoping to avoid an arguement with you because you argue like a 5 year old conspiracy nut. If you'll recall months ago I requested that you never post to me again. Since then I haven't posted to you, nor have I posted on threads you were on, I even stopped posting on threads you came to after I got there. Until monday morning when I post to Jeeves, just dipped the toe in the water for a moment, had no intention of it turning into something big. Then you posted at me.

No MS only people don't like you because you insult them. None of us care what you use. The probem comes in when you start telling us we're fools for not doing what you do and are a liability to our company.

But of course this is the classic example of what's worng with you. You can't concede any point no matter how small. There are 3 sane reactions to being told you insulted someone. The person who did it unintentionally will apologize and possibly ask for clarification on how they were in sulting. The person who did it on purpose will either blow it off or reply with something even more insulting. You will argue the point for two days inventing wild oxymoronic phrases like "politely suggesting they wasted their boss' time and money". Why? Because you're not sane. It's anathema to the very structure of your personality to ever give an inch and must change others. Anyone that is insulted when you question their decision is WRONG, anyone that doesn't use Java after all the great things you've said about it is WRONG anyone that use MS products is WRONG anyone that puts for evidence that you're feces actually does stink is WRONG; and they all must be beaten into submission.

As for my opinion of .Net, which i don't use but I've spent long enough on MS's bleeding edge I've got a pretty good feel for their first rev is simple and I've posted it on this thread already, but you didn't want to listen and won't want to now. It's new so it's got lumps. Those lumps by no means keep it from being ready for primetime, which is proven by the number of organizations that are using it in primetime right now, it just means they need to factor in some slightly higher development costs getting it to primetime because they're going to have to navigate through the lumps.

Now for the new news that I hadn't put elsewhere. There is one really good reason to use it inspite of the lumps. It's the same reason there is to be an MS shop: interoperability. Nothing talks to a MS application like another MS application. As a matter of fact no app talks to another app like two (or more) MS apps. MS apps work and play well together. You want to get the most out of your MS SQL backend, write the frontend in something from MS. I can and have taken data from MS SQL with Access, massaged it, dumped into Excel, added a graph, inserted the entire spreadsheet into a Word doc and e-mailed that puppy out of Outlook through an Exchange server. And it's easy too. Just a handful of mouse clicks and you're moving data through 6 different apps on three different computers, and most people probably don't even realize they're doing that kind of stuff, that's how smooth it is. And the scary news is that except for the e-mail part you've been able to do that since the 3.x days (though it was a real bitch to code, man OLE sucked... until you got it working). MS haters call it illegal product tieing. Users call it damn convenient. And I have absolutely no doubt that .Net continues the tradition of being better at communicating with other MS products (or other things created with MS products) than anything MS doesn't make. It's what they're good at, it's the reason MS is able to sell the MS only model to so many places. Interoperability rocks, and nothing MS doesn't make can hold a candle to them in this area. Even when MS products suck (which happens, no denying that, though not nearly as often as the basher say, and less often every day) they still talk to each other smoothly.

Those lumps by no means keep it from being ready for primetime, which is proven by the number of organizations that are using it in primetime right now, it just means they need to factor in some slightly higher development costs getting it to primetime because they're going to have to navigate through the lumps.

But the point that has come out is that there is no evidence it is being used for prime-time, yet. Just MS press releases that don't give details. Every time you hear a detail, like above, it's negative.

'Prime-time' would mean deployed, mission-critical implementations.

And we can't find one single example of that, no matter how many folks we ask. The only developer who chimed in, Mr. Jeeves, made an exaggerated claim that turned out to be untrue.

That's what I'm asking for, specifically, here. Another fellow specifically posted a thread with that title. I've combed the net and trade publications. There are no details of any .NET success.

P.S. -- MS-only folks don't like me because I use Java, and talk about Java. This seems to "insult" them, as you've said.

And I can live with that.

Believe it or not, I have *no* problems discussing with anyone else. Look around at the other threads I participate in. We have polite, adult conversations. I criticize Oracle, Sun, Apple, and many others. We discuss it, and have no problems.

It's only the MS-only folks who react this way.

Consider. Above, I said,

The American software industry -- from Oracle to MS to Sun -- has in the past sold a bunch of software that was a pretty poor-quality product, as every other industry measures quality.

I say that kind of thing all the time. In one thread, I went on and on about how I feel that Oracle is the absolute worst quality software out there -- in one case, to make an Oracle installation y2k compliant, we had to apply almost a hundred patches.

Now oddly enough, no Oracle or Sun people jumped on my case -- just MS folks.

I talk about how I don't like Apple's, and think they're overpriced. Mac fans don't jump on my case. I talk about how I don't think Linux is ready for the desktop. Linux fans don't jump on my case.

And on, and on.

It's the MS-only folks who seem incapable of dealing with the slightest criticism.

Wonder why?