Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> Let me see if I can't address your comments by citing two examples
> that I've come across in the last 24 hours. I wasn't looking for these --
> in fact, I've spent most of the last 24 hours asleep as my body fights
> off the flu/cold/blech that I seem to have.
Ahh, but still found time to reply to WC, thanks much. Take care.
> Example #1: The Demoroniser: correct moronic and gratuitously incompatible
> Microsoft HTML. Read about it (and weep) at:
>
> http://www.fourmilab.ch/webtools/demoroniser/
Every single instance I've seen of an MS product generating HTML has made me
cringe. Nice to see someone developed a "demoroniser", wonder if they'll
make a "dedreamweaverizer" and a "depagemillizer"?
> Example #2: Microsoft Exchange. The following conversational thread
> has been taking place on the Spam-L mailing list...
<snip>
Yes, as I mentioned in an earlier thread, I wouldn't even consider using an
MS product to handle mailserving. However, there *are* decent software
packages from 3rd parties that run on NT, such as post.office
http://www.software.com ). Nonetheless, when I think of a mailserver, I
automatically think Unix.
> This sort of thing happens just about every day. So I don't really bother
> keeping track of all of the ways that Microsoft's products ignore real
> and de facto standards because (a) I do not use or support Microsoft
> products and (b) there's really no need for me to keep a list on hand
> because fresh evidence arrives on a daily basis.
As you said, "why bother", unless you have to maintain that kind of system.
> As to the scalability/portability comments that I made: the cheapest
> way to solve many problems is to throw hardware at them. (Hardware is
> now ridiculously cheap, and a lot of great software is free, while
> programmer time is still hideously expensive.) But if your software
> isn't portable to other architectures, especially those that scale,
> you don't have this option available, and you may have to do it the
> hard (and expensive) way.
Yes, and making the decision to create "portable" software depends on
picking the OS that is "portable" to other hardware configs, or designing
the software using software that is portable to other OS's that are portable
to other hardware configs, heh (Java, perl, cross-OS compatible databases,
etc). I understand your point re: portability and scaling now. Thanks.
Jack
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The NEW Web Consultants Association FORUMS and CHAT:
Register Today at: http://just4u.com/forums/
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
Give the Gift of Life This Year...
Just4U Stop Smoking Support forum - helping smokers for
over three years-tell a friend: http://just4u.com/forums/
To get 500 Banner Ads for FREE
go to http://www.linkbuddies.com/start.go?id=111261
---------------------------------------------------------------------
