Message-ID: <37AD072B.30EB14EE@megsinet.net> From: David Oppenheimer 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$1 AT autumn DOT news DOT rcn DOT net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 26 Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 00:27:25 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.81.172.138 X-Trace: news.corecomm.net 934086430 209.81.172.138 (Sat, 07 Aug 1999 23:27:10 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 23:27:10 CDT To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Dear Chris, Please read the section more carefully. I think that M$ 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.