Hehe, I love a message that says, "You must be polite!" and then goes on to
slur an entire continent of people. Cool.
--
Shawn Brock
sdbrock_at_ssallc.com
David wrote in message ...
>
>Nuno Souto wrote in message <7hegdg$a2g$1_at_m2.c2.telstra-mm.net.au>...
>>Abbot Cooper <cooper_NoSpam_ab_at_mediaone.net> wrote in message
>news:7hcf9b$ck6>
>>Yup - you have completely hit the nail on the head. How many days would
>>> programmers in the past spend to scrunch 3K of code down into 2K because
>RAM
>>> was more costly than gold? Now this becomes entirely irrelevant
>(generally
>>> irrelevant -- I am sure someone will have some exception to my
>statement...)
>>> because RAM is now about as costly as dirt. Does it make sense to spend
3
>>> weeks tuning your code to get the last few bytes out of it when RAM is
>>> plentiful? Of course it does not make sense, unless you have an overly
>>> developed sense of aesthetics. From a strictly business standpoint it is
>not
>>> economically efficient, period.
>>
>>
>>Here we go again with the typical MS and "expert magazine" marketing
>DRIVEL!!!!!
>
>
>What exactly does MS marketing have to do with his summary on how the
>industry has changed. This has nothing to do with marketing. Are you so
>mindless that you have to parrot your broken record phrase of "MS Marketing
>is behind it!" over and over and over without really responding to the
>point?
>
>He is absolutely correct when he says that times have changed in regards to
>development due to cheaper RAM. I remember when coding for the PDP (only
>16-64k depending on how much money you had) you had to take the uttmost
care
>in writing for efficiency due to the memory limitations.
>
>>Wrong! We are talking about picking an application that has maybe 500K
>>lines of code and turning it into a 200Mb monster that does essentially
the
>>SAME!
>
>
>Nuno, you really need a lesson in manners. Here in the US it isn't
necessary
>that you agree with the other person, but what is required is courtesy and
>politeness, not upper-case screaming and rudeness.
>What kinds of manners do they teach you in Australia? Maybe it was because
>Australia was originally populated with English felons... I don't know.
>
>As to your comment on the size of the application, do you have any clue as
>to the size and complexity of the application? Or are you just pulling
these
>numbers out of your bung-hole?
>
>>What is the VALUE to the user in that? Absolutely NONE!
>>
>>WHATEVER the cost of memory may be. Don't use semantics or common place
>>argumentation to try and confuse the issue, you can't do that with me,
been
>>around
>>for too long. NOBODY is questioning that memory is cheaper and therefore
>it is
>>easier to code larger programs.
>>
>>What is being questioned is WHAT IS THE VALUE TO USERS of that additional
>code
>>if it achieves NOTHING but sell new versions of hardware and software?
>
>
>Actually I find that the latest versions of Word do offer quite a bit more.
>I am now able to link URLS and edit HTML directly in Word. You might not
>need all the features (like I said before, I think you need to look into
>using Notepad for all your simple needs) but at least they are available
and
>you can always choose not to install them. As far as the size of Word, it
>hasnt really gotten any bigger in size in proportion to the average hard
>drive size. Hard drives being shipped with new machines have gone from 1
Gig
>a few years ago to 18 Gigs today. If Word is still only around 100 megs to
>install, that isnt too bad.
>
>>Name ONE feature of Word97 that makes it absolutely IMPERATIVE and
>NECESSARY
>>and VALUABLE for the majority of users to upgrade to it? What did you get
>for
>>the
>>extra hardware requirement?
>
>
>You could really say the same about most applications. I am sure you could
>get by with an Atari ST and the Word Processor that shipped with it, but
>people like improvement whether they are large or small.
>
>>And you think that makes a lot of sense and is "economically efficient,
>period"?
>>
>>No wonder it is MS making the money, not you...
>
>
>Actually I am making a ton with MS as I have had their stocks for many
years
>now and watched thier stock double almost on a yearly basis. Rather than
>bash MS, why don't we have a conversation about what kinds of wonderful
>software products Australian software companies have produced? Now that is
>something we all can whole heartidly laugh about.
>
>LOL
>
>David
>
>>
>>--
>>Cheers
>>Nuno Souto
>>nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au
>>http://www.acay.com.au/~nsouto/welcome.htm
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Wed May 19 1999 - 09:20:44 CDT
