>I think John may have been referring to the general tone of the entire article. It's available online at: http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/08/21/000821oplewis.xml

Thanks for the link, Ken. Here are the few additional paragraphs that referenced .NET:

"Does it all look like Microsoft.NET, or does it mean something?"

"Meaningless visions like Microsoft.NET are punishments for the sins of our forefathers."

"Although it's tempting to be an artist, painting blurry abstract swirls others can interpret as they choose, abstract artistry isn't leadership. It isn't vision. It's Microsoft.NET."

That's still slammin'...

Steven-


>
>>I think anytime I read:
>>
>>Ignore it. If by some miracle it succeeds...
>>
>>I am going to consider it a slam.
>>
>>>Not exactly original advice...Unless it is a feature you cannot live without, being an early adopter of technology has little, if no upside..
>>>
>>>That said, I would hardly call .Net getting slammed...< s >..
>>>
>>>
>>>>Given some recent postings about Microsoft.NET I thought this might be of interest.
>>>>
>>>>"Microsoft.NET is a nonstarter. Ignore it. If by some miracle it succeeds, you'll pay little penalty for waiting. You have no reason to be an early adopter (and of what? There's no product!) and lots of reasons to wait and see what happens."
>>>>
>>>>--Bob Lewis, InfoWorld columnist in "IS Survival."