Re: does this multi-value product exist?

Hi Brian,

>What he seemed to be saying to me is that some people approach the
>debate from a dogmatic (religious?) viewpoint rather than one based on

Astute observation, Brian. In this thread there is a great example:

Also sprach Tony G:
>>In fact the only reason I'm piping up here is to point out that while
>>Ross probably didn't intend this, there _is_ a somewhat infectious
>>hypocritical trend in the OSS market against M$, which sort of smacks
>>the concept of "open" right in the face. It reminds me of the saying
>>"all men are created equal but some are more equal than others".
>>(Reference also made about animals in Animal Farm and apes in Planet
>>of the Apes, but I digress from my digression). The trend is for many
>>open source developers to write code only for Linux because they say
>>Win32 is buggy or it just sucks. It's obvious in many of these cases
>>that the problems they cite are imagined or exaggerated to suit their
>>agenda, and that they don't even attempt to find solutions to their
>>issues in a manner comparable with their Linux debugging efforts -
>>they just choose to dismiss Win32.
>>I don't mind if one platform is truly superior to another and one wins
>>out over another. What I do object to is when people do something
>>wrong to further a cause that they feel is right - it just makes them
>>as bad as the evil they're trying to replace. There's way too much of
>>that going on in the world today, the least of which is when some
>>relational guy says Pick sucks or it's buggy - NOW who side are you
>>going to jump on?

'Infectious' as applies to a development model???

'do something wrong' and 'hypocritical' by making a choice about the
tools one uses???

On the other hand, I guess that this _is_ CDP, isn't it? LOL

>That is, some people take the view that system A sucks
>therefore I will develop using system B - but their reasons for
>declaring system A to be bad are suspect and similar problems can be
>found in their preferred system B.

Suspect??? LOL

Please see my response to the above in this thread. Why is it that you
think that I (or anyone else) is intellectually dishonest because I
choose not to develop for the system of _your_ choice? What earthly
concern of yours is the rationale for any choices I may make?

The answer to all of this is quite simple: If you wish it to be
developed for your system of choice, do it. If you haven't the
capacity to do it, hire someone to do it. If you can't afford to hire
someone to do it, don't carp at others for how they choose to invest
their donated time and resources or whine about the corruption of the
open source system.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: [RFC] sema_wait_sig
    ... developers away. ... should we favourite code duplication? ... What is the reason? ... be used by anything but VFS. ...
  • Re: Existing forms to PDF or Excel
    ... It's a valid opinion. ... developers that have the same opinion. ... but basically, shoddiness comes to mind often, as well as the fact ... things offered for which "public accpetance" was far from the reason ...
  • Re: ProDOS Plus
    ... This might depend on how many application developers actually followed Apple's guidelines regarding ProDOS. ... Any new functionality would still be subject to less efficient testing ... (and this is a good reason to limit the new functionality). ...
  • Re: Most of the classes in the .NET Framework are written in C#
    ... I really don't see a reason for VB.NET given the fact that it certainly ... Programmers who need to learn VB.NET coming from VB classic ... >>> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. ... >>> seem to be almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net ...
  • Re: mfc or dotnet?
    ... I'm going to assume that the reason existing developers want to stick ... Will MFC presumably be supported as long as .NET? ... and your colleagues really know whether it's an avenue you can afford to ...