Yes, they never talk about the programming, do they? I guess computers in the future will not have to be programmed. If we took up a collection, we might be able to buy a product placement.

The script:

Visitor: (Looking in awe at the computers and obviously appreciating the ease of use and pertinent and timely information they supply) "This system is fantastic! What language was it programmed in?"

Jordi: (In a very matter-of-fact and 'what else would it be' way) "Visual FoxPro 78, of course."

Who's going to start collecting the money? <g>



>I wonder what language they use in Stargate and Startrek. They always press on some colored buttons for a second or two and then there's that wonderful solution to their complex problem.
>
>>My theory is that this is partly due to who's running the show. And I don't mean M$. I mean who are the people developing languages and who are the people charting the course. Many of these people are smart guys/gals, no doubt. But I think too many of them, and too many programmers, like the complexity. It appeals to their egos. If you talk about simplicity, they kind of snicker at you. "Oh, not smart enough, are you?" I value clear, concise languages like xBASE languages, the VB prior to .NET, Pascal. I steer clear of the cryptic languages, such as C, C++, C#, and others (and you can go too far towards readability, with COBOL being a prime example). Then there are the people, perhaps you included, sorry, who muck up a readable language with Hungarian Notation (poor solution to a problem). And, of course, there's the rush to invent new things to do and much less emphasis on providing improved ways of doing the things that really matter.
>>
>>>Fred,
>>>
>>>I'm not talking about an app generator, nor anything like it.
>>>
>>>What I am saying is that it baffles me why after 20+ years of development, things are in such a sad state of affairs in the software world. Computers were supposed to make our lives easier!