Yes, I cc'd everyone. Flame me if you must!! < bg >

The article was about a more general topic. .Net was compared to SAA. Okay...

Did .Net get slammed? I suppose so. But did Lewis really say anything that we don't know already about technology in general? Not really.

And FWIW, .Net is so new, so different, it really is too early to make any conclusions.

FWIW, the article to me indicted the marketing aspect of things. From a technical standpoint, the article is very light. In fact, there are no technical specifics at all.

So, bascially, the guy slammed .Net without providing any real specifics. Gee, the guy would be right at home on the UT..< s >..

It is like most of what is printed in those rags today - utter crap....

To me, it ranks high on Ed Rauh's BS O meter....

I don't know who I pity more, the author, or the people that take this crap seriously....< s >...




>Hi Chris,
>
>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
>
>>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."