"Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message news:jfis68$2uv7$1...@digitalmars.com... > "Andrej Mitrovic" <andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.722.1327291162.16222.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >>I find it kind of funny that someone would use a *new* language to >> support an *ancient* platform. If someone is still hacking with win9x >> support I bet their dev environment is -- VC6. > > While I agree 9x isn't worth supporting, calling it "ancient" is pure > hyperbole. CP/M is ancient. ProDOS is arguably ancient. Hell, Win2 could > even be called ancient. Win9x is just simply old/outdated. Christ, it > includes an OS (WinMe) that's arguably *ONE* version prior to a version > that's still heavily used - XP. (Hell, even Win98 was the version that > *most* people used immediately prior to the still-heavily-used XP). > > I know I'm going all off on something that really is nitpicky, but misuse > of grandiose words like "ancient", "epic", etc., to refer to fairly > trivial matters is a bit of a pet peeve... > > (Hell, using "ancient" to refer to "computers more than 5-10 years old" is > itself rather..."ancient".) >
FWIW, I do agree that "new language on an...outdated...platform" does have an air of anachronism.
