Ballmer gives IT pros a bear hug

TalkBack 46 of 73:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Why don't you make sure that

you have alredy taken care of your own 'holes'? You think that you are impervious to your own criticism?

If you could cool down for a sec and use your head for a while you would see that my points are valid, albeit stated in an exaggarated fashion.

Your 'reply' was a rabid attack in the name of all those who cannot take the rabid attackers. Very ... cool and even headed approach. Congrats.

BTW, it is exactly the technical inadequacy of ms windows and the fact that maintenance of the same is SO WASTEFUL in man-hours and resources that makes me disdainful of it, its 'designers' and its light-brained supporters. For the last ones ofcourse, it is their right to KEEP falling prey to the MS predators. However, for everyone who knows BETTER (e.g., UNIX, OpenVMS, *BSD, linux, etc.) these people appear as the morons who root for their tormentors.

``But we have .net and we have the `modern' 'technmology' ...'' Non-sense: a fancy GUI does not imply technology. UNIX could do things that MS wndows does not allow people yet, since 20 years ago. It is called distributed processing and it can take ANY FORM that is convenient to the application architect. e.g., client-server was implemented and deployed on UNIX first. Distributed objects, the same. Peer-to-peer, the same. Java (write once, execute everywhere) was done outside the ms windwoes platfrom on UNIX. .net is a cheap immitation of Java.

Bottom line: ms apps CANNOT run outside MS windwoes, mo matter how beatutiful your PC desktop is (which is NOT really).

On the other hand, UNIX and Linux apps can easily be built and deployed on ANY NON MS platform. You consider this an inferrior technical feat? You'r BASKING in your ignorance. The reason that PORTABILITY is MUCH easier on non-MS platforms is because the apps are architected to be portable: OS, run-time environments, middle-ware and apps are LAYERED and CLEANLY defined funcitonalities and APIs are employed. I can implement a different lower layer for a different platform and I don't have to change the ENTIRE s/w stack: the APIs and the semantics are the same, so I only need to provide that layer.

Try to do this with .net and MS windwoes: you have to re-write EVERYTHING since many things have migrated to the 'kernel' and they are hard to change without braking otrher things.... Let alone the security concerns.

As I said above, for everyone who knows BETTER the people who brainlessly support inferrior technology, appear as the morons who root for their tormentors.

grow up and read up.

BTW, if you have a technical question don't be affraid to ask. Same with technical arguments; but you haven't provided ANY so far.

-m

Posted by: michael_t   Posted on: 06/07/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• The Impact of Virtualization Software on Operating Environments VMware Today's use of virtualization technology allows IT professionals to ... Download Now
• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now