Totally off topic, but as someone who likes .Net, I'll just say this is
obvious. I myself have described .Net as a super COM object that comes
with windows. If someone is critical of .Net as didn't know this
already, they really dont have enough information to form any useful
opinion. It would be an opinion based in ignorance. The article is FUD,
plain and simple. The author doesn't even fully grasp the concept of
what ActiveX is.
jon
Jackson Moore (CFTalk) wrote:
>In case you haven't seen it, this article came out on Monday on
> computerworld.com and in their newsletters. For those of you
> who are critical of .net and want some more material to back up
> your position, here you go:
>
>http://www.computerworld.com/rckey11/story/0,1199,NAV63_STO63605,
>00.html
>
>Jackson Moore
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
