Re: Development standards for the World ( was RE:ASPThresholdinformation )

["James H H Lampert" <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Jones, John \(US\)" <John.Jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It's sort-of two sides to the same coin in that the end 
> result is functionally similar, but I think it provokes a 
> different development methodology.  If you start with the
> fancy stuff and degrade, . . .

Uh, who in his right mind "starts with the fancy stuff and 
degrades"?

The way I was taught, "degrading gracefully" isn't a 
development methodology; it's simply the result of proper 
design.

And as to what I meant by draconian or fascist enforcement 
of standards, I was referring to shops in which anything 
beyond (or sometimes including) as changing the 
screen-saver or wallpaper on one's computer is considered 
grounds for immediate termination. Around here, even when 
WinDoze XP was finally shoved down my throat (something I 
ONLY accepted because I'd wasted half a day, and 
thoroughly screwed up my NT box, trying to fix what had in 
fact been a network problem!), some of us have 
Microschlong Office, while others have OpenOffice, and in 
general, people have what they need.

We can all be thankful that IBM decided not to be 
draconian about it when they discovered that their 
Rochester unit, which had been ordered to develop a better 
plugboard-programmable unit record machine, had invented 
the S-3 instead.

--
JHHL