On 11/13/06, DeLong, Eric <EDeLong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<Steve said...> what technical reason could there be that it would not work? MSFT is really good about maintaining backwards compatibility. <End> Really? That sure doesn't seem to match MY experience with MSFT..... Have you been drinking Mr. Bill's happy juice again? If not, then perhaps you can explain what you mean by this....
I can try ... What problems have you had with MSFT software? My experience as a programmer is that MSFT is by far the best in terms of the programability of their products. Linux does not have an exception handling model, no basic call stack support and knows nothing of managed code. The end result is a Perl program knows nothing of Java which cant interact with SQL procedures, PHP, etc. At least no where to the degree that modern applications need these languages to work together. The i5 is a bit better because it has 15 YO ILE but the grafting on of PASE binaries and SQL procedures has been kludgy at best. MSFT's .NET is proving itself to be everything the smart people who created it said it would be. Programming .NET, esp at the beginner's level, has never been easier. They made over $4B in pre tax profits this past quarter - that tells you a lot of customers like their products. -Steve
amazon.com ads help fund midrange.com operations