Message-ID:	<37AD072B.30EB14EE@megsinet.net>
From:	David Oppenheimer <davidopp AT megsinet DOT net>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: DOS obselete? Programmers isnt needed???
References:	<7ob2ge$i3v$1 AT nnrp1 DOT deja DOT com> <37A92688 DOT 620B1D1C AT a DOT crl DOT com> <7obvgc$5sf$1 AT nnrp1 DOT deja DOT com> <37AA851E DOT 933E1CB8 AT megsinet DOT net> <7oiu53$ris$1 AT autumn DOT news DOT rcn DOT net>
Lines:	26
Date:	Sun, 08 Aug 1999 00:27:25 -0400
NNTP-Posting-Host:	209.81.172.138
X-Trace:	news.corecomm.net 934086430 209.81.172.138 (Sat, 07 Aug 1999 23:27:10 CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Sat, 07 Aug 1999 23:27:10 CDT
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Dear Chris,

Please read the section more carefully.  I think that M$ Visual Basic and
Visual C++ are overpriced and that their names are misleading.  I believe you
have interpreted my statement wrong if you think I find them desirable.



Chris Lee wrote:

> In article <37AA851E DOT 933E1CB8 AT megsinet DOT net>, davidopp AT megsinet DOT net says...
>  can guarantee that the
>
> >
> >Either ride the wave of the future or get crushed by it.  Those are the
> >choices.   In case you are wondering, Visual Basic and Visual C++ pale by
> >comparison to Sanscript and Prograph.  How they can even include "Visual"
> >in their names is beyond me.   If the fact that you can see the textual
> >code as you are writing it on a screen makes it visual, then let's start
> >referring to DJGPP as Visual DJGPP...LOL
>
> Load of bullshit. Can you say Linux/Unix? People like yourself who
> actually think Visual Basic and Visual C++ is something to be desired are
> laughed at by most Linux/Unix programers who for the most part can't stand
> these tools.

- Raw text -