Wish I had time to reply to more posts, especially Evan Harris' and Joe's...
(Getting backed up on some projects that can't wait...)

Briefly, IMHO, you and Evan got it "extremely right", Al...!  Joe got it
right, but you two got it EXTREMELY RIGHT.  Obviously, I'm biased in that I
agree 100% with both of your views, so I make some allowance for that...

But when you said, "I personally consider that paradigm an insane bonfire of
corporate funds that many companies could be spending more productively",
you're a spawning trout going upstream against the CW.  I never recommend
that, just to "break the rules", but I agree with you it's necessary in the
present climate.  Because I agree the CW on this point is hosed...

But I think it's a HUGE mistake to consider the CW "insane", although it
sure appears that companies make business judgments that work directly
AGAINST their bottom line.  That appears insane, but is more a reflection of
the wanton excess of the past decade or two, in general (IMV).  As long as
you view the CW as not logical, you won't be able to address the situation
properly, AFAIK.  It's logical and consistent with the idea that it
represents an attitude of wild excess...  And also points that there is a
great likelihood that times are changing, of their own accord.  It just
might be the right time for a new CW!

So when you said, "Buying QUALITY products that have guaranteed standards is
the paradigm we need to get these numbskulls back to & I have no idea how",
I would ask if you have any reason to believe the iNation could NOT
accomplish this, or at least influence the events, somewhat...?!?  I'm not
trying to address the question of whether the iNation will ever "gel", and
actually attempt this...  That's a separate (and very valid) issue to

I'm just asking whether or not you think it's theoretically possible, or
not.  (I would also suggest the iSN-Citizens list is more appropriate for
the reply to this last question.)


| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of MacWheel99@aol.com
| Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 1:15 PM
| To: midrange-l@midrange.com
| Subject: Re: Where are all of the /400's going. Part 1 of 2
| In my opinion, which I recognize is a minority opinion, computer
| technology
| WAS great, HAD great potential, MAY have again, but in recent years, the
| overall average installed quality has been in free fall because of this
| contemporary viewpoint that NEW is better than legacy that works.  It does
| not matter if the new works well or as well as the legacy, it only matters
| that it is new & different.
| In fact the idea that upgrading to next version of Windows means that you
| have to throw away all your old applications & get your data
| moved to newly
| purchased application software that runs on the new version, that makes
| absolute sense to these people who believe that NEW is the only
| reality worth
| considering.
| I personally consider that paradigm an insane bonfire of
| corporate funds that
| many companies could be spending more productively.
| There is also the contermporary viewpoint that CHEAP is better
| than quality.
| It does not matter if tech support is in name only.  It is of no
| consequence
| that some vendors issue flawed fixes, which ought to be tested before
| implementing, what they get from Microsoft they do not know that anything
| better state of art is even possible.  Who looks at operating costs?
| There are many improvements we have seen in what can be done, but
| I am just
| saying that overall, the mob of businesses buying into computer systems in
| which security is a joke, data bases do not manage themselves, you have to
| hire an army of people to do what the 400 does automatically
| built in, there
| are people earning much more than I do, and they spending most of
| their time
| replacing flawed patches with more flawed patches because their management
| thinks there is no better state of art.
| Let them earn more money doing a job that has high levels of frustration &
| after years of doing this, what do they have to show for their effort?  A
| business in the same condition as it was years ago & no end in sight for
| continuing the same kind of wheel spinning.  My satisfaction is that I
| develop software that helps my users & we build on our creations,
| expanding
| the full spectrum of what we can do with what we have.
| US National Security is at risk because the computer infrastructure is
| overwhelmingly dominated by what was purchased by people who do
| not have the
| foggiest notion that when you buy the cheapest possible you get
| exactly what
| you paid for, and when you replace stuff that works good, with
| stuff that is
| NEW, you really can be continuously worse off.
| Buying into NEW CHEAP is like rolling the dice to get a random situation.
| Buying QUALITY products that have guaranteed standards is the paradigm we
| need to get these numbskulls back to & I have no idea how.
| MacWheel99@aol.com (Alister Wm Macintyre) (Al Mac)
| _______________________________________________
| This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
| mailing list
| To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
| To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
| visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
| or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
| Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
| at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.