RE: RPGIII compiler vs Visual Basic

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Walden H. Leverich
> 
> Now I grant that it was quite often necessary to
> do things that were undocumetned to do "cool" things, but not to do
the
> things Windows was designed for at the time.

You say cool, I say functional.  The point is that it was necessary, and
encouraged, to do these things in the Windows developer community.  As
for the APIs, the move from 16 to 32-bit was about as painful as you
could get.  Thunking is an evil thing.


> Sure, I'll admit Windows 3.1 wasn't ready for business, heck the
entire
> 95/98/ME line was a joke. But the NT/XP line, and 2003 Server is a
> wholely different beast. You're complaining that a Ford Model T was a
> pleasant toy, so a Mac truck isn't a good business machine.

The Redmond folks learned a lot from OS/2, but not enough to make
Windows a business class operating system.  It's more stable, certainly,
but it doesn't scale without lots of machines, and the more I look into
it, the more I find that distributed databases simply suck.  And if it
weren't for the monopolistic stranglehold Windows currently has, I'd
recommend against it for security reasons alone.

I will rate it as an adequate desktop environment (sorry, JHHL, it's
almost usable these days) that wins business decisions by sheer weight
of install base.  But calling it a good business machine (and implying
that it's a good server) is too far for my good.

File server?  Okay.  Mail server?  Passable, I guess.  I don't use it.
Database server?  No way.  Business logic server?  See previous.

Joe