"How Microsoft Lost the API War"

[John Bailo]

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html

"So you've got the Windows API, you've got VB, and now you've got .NET,
in several language flavors, and don't get too attached to any of that,
because we're making Avalon, you see, which will only run on the newest
Microsoft operating system, which nobody will have for a loooong time.
And personally I still haven't had time to learn .NET very deeply, and
we haven't ported Fog Creek's two applications from classic ASP and
Visual Basic 6.0 to .NET because there's no return on investment for us.
None. It's just Fire and Motion as far as I'm concerned: Microsoft would
love for me to stop adding new features to our bug tracking software and
content management software and instead waste a few months porting it to
another programming environment, something which will not benefit a
single customer and therefore will not gain us one additional sale, and
therefore which is a complete waste of several months, which is great
for Microsoft, because they have content management software and bug
tracking software, too, so they'd like nothing better than for me to
waste time spinning cycles catching up with the flavor du jour, and then
waste another year or two doing an Avalon version, too, while they add
features to their own competitive software. Riiiight."

[John Bailo]

Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:

Innovation did not stop with the invention of fire.

Good analogy. But, also note, that progress has not stopped the use of
fire, even in the 21st century.

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

John,

Innovation did not stop with the invention of fire.

Good analogy. But, also note, that progress has not stopped the use of
fire, even in the 21st century.

True John, however I like more to use by instance matches or a lighter to
make that, than the tools as in the days that it was invented.

You could have expected this answer

:-))))

Cor

[Nikos Chantziaras]

Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:

What on earth is wrong with good old C and C++? Why does MS keep
inventing new languages and VMs? Are they going to rewrite their kernel
in VB and .NET? Should be difficult to do, given the fact that the NT
kernel is currently written in QBASIC. Line numbers and gotos are hard to
port...

What is wrong with good old macro assembler, why did they event languages as
C?

:-)

Innovation did not stop with the invention of fire.

To me, it looks more like MS is going backwards. Their new products
decrease portability, rather than enhancing it. Hmm, why is that?

I just noticed that the OP has cross posted this to m.p.dotnet.gene ral.
Maybe in hope to start yet another holy war. Replies are therefore
redirected to c.o.l.advocacy, the *only* place where flaming is allowed
by definition... :)

[Arkady Duntov]

On Thursday 18 August 2005 01:37, Nikos Chantziaras <re****@hotmail .com>
(<43*********** ************@au then.white.read freenews.net>) wrote:

John Bailo wrote:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html

"So you've got the Windows API, you've got VB, and now you've got .NET,
in several language flavors
What on earth is wrong with good old C and C++?

They aren't simple and/or safe.
Why does MS keep inventing new languages and VMs?

The otherwise unexplainable success of Sun's Java "platoform" is a threat to
The Microsoft Hegemony. Their new languages and VMs are intended as
nothing more than Java killers.

[Linønut]

Arkady Duntov poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:

On Thursday 18 August 2005 01:37, Nikos Chantziaras <re****@hotmail .com>
(<43*********** ************@au then.white.read freenews.net>) wrote:

John Bailo wrote:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html

"So you've got the Windows API, you've got VB, and now you've got .NET,
in several language flavors

What on earth is wrong with good old C and C++?

They aren't simple and/or safe.

C is simple, but it is not safe.

C++ is safe (sort of), but it is not simple.

Java may be safe, but it is not simple.

Perl is not simple, and may not be safe.

.... (continue with your own aphorisms)

--
Linux - A most satisfying eXPerience

[The Ghost In The Machine]

In comp.os.linux.a dvocacy, Cor Ligthert [MVP]
<no************ @planet.nl>
wrote
on Thu, 18 Aug 2005 10:32:08 +0200
<ew************ **@TK2MSFTNGP14 .phx.gbl>:

What on earth is wrong with good old C and C++? Why does MS keep
inventing new languages and VMs? Are they going to rewrite their kernel
in VB and .NET? Should be difficult to do, given the fact that the NT
kernel is currently written in QBASIC. Line numbers and gotos are hard to
port...

What is wrong with good old macro assembler, why did they event languages as
C?

:-)

Innovation did not stop with the invention of fire.

Cor

Luxury! In my day we didn't truck with all those newfangled
fiddlybits like Java, C/C++/VB! We did it the old-fashioned
way, trudging through octal dumplistings 5 miles uphill both ways...
and that was before plugboards were invented.

:-)

On a slightly more serious note -- I've now forgotten it (haven't
used it in awhile and you know what they say...), but I used
to have to key in a tapeloader for my 1802. It was about 2 dozen
or so bytes in length.

As for NT in QBasic...I can't say, but VMS was at one point written in
BLISS, and parts of AmigaDOS (not the kernel) were probably written
in BCPL.

Apple had an interesting Sweet16 interpreter, which I for one have
no idea exactly what its purpose was.

--
#191, ew****@earthlin k.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.

[Phil Da Lick!]

Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:

What on earth is wrong with good old C and C++? Why does MS keep
inventing new languages and VMs? Are they going to rewrite their kernel
in VB and .NET? Should be difficult to do, given the fact that the NT
kernel is currently written in QBASIC. Line numbers and gotos are hard to
port...

What is wrong with good old macro assembler, why did they event languages as
C?

:-)

Innovation did not stop with the invention of fire.

But innovation hasn't really started with M$ yet has it?

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Phil,

Innovation did not stop with the invention of fire.

But innovation hasn't really started with M$ yet has it?

What is innovation will always be a question of personal acceptance.

Apes do still not like fire.

Cor

[Linønut]

Cor Ligthert [MVP] poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:

Phil,

Innovation did not stop with the invention of fire.

But innovation hasn't really started with M$ yet has it?

What is innovation will always be a question of personal acceptance.

Apes do still not like fire.

We are apes.

--
Linux - A most satisfying eXPerience

[Phil Da Lick!]

Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:

Phil,

Innovation did not stop with the invention of fire.

But innovation hasn't really started with M$ yet has it?

What is innovation will always be a question of personal acceptance.

Apes do still not like fire.

some apes are happy with fire, but others wont settle for anything less
than a flamthrower.