Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #24771 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-08-23 20:05 +0200 |
| Last post | 2012-09-13 20:39 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 386 — 52 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-23 20:05 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-23 20:28 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-23 21:06 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-08-23 12:44 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-23 22:14 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-23 14:15 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2012-08-23 22:07 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2012-08-23 16:20 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-23 22:51 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Daniel Weber <usenet@daniel-weber.eu> - 2012-08-24 09:33 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-24 09:51 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Daniel Weber <usenet@daniel-weber.eu> - 2012-08-24 13:30 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-24 13:32 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Daniel Weber <usenet@daniel-weber.eu> - 2012-08-24 13:46 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-08-24 15:44 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language ozbear@bigpond.com (ozbear) - 2012-08-26 02:22 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-08-26 00:19 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language ozbear@bigpond.com (ozbear) - 2012-08-27 00:25 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-23 13:51 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language CRNG <Spam@uce.gov> - 2012-08-23 16:57 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-23 18:01 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-08-23 15:21 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-23 19:04 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-23 23:26 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-23 19:14 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-24 11:35 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-24 21:03 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-24 18:46 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-24 21:13 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-24 21:08 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-25 10:41 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-08-25 10:50 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 22:35 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-26 02:17 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 02:58 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-08-26 15:32 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-01 23:02 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Leo Havmøller <rtxleh@nospam.nospam> - 2012-08-24 06:52 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-24 09:00 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-23 23:16 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-24 00:06 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-24 09:18 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Leo Havmøller <rtxleh@nospam.nospam> - 2012-08-24 09:22 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-24 09:53 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-24 03:48 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-08-24 15:28 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 10:20 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 22:43 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-08-25 03:30 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-01 23:11 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-01 23:10 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 10:16 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-08-25 02:45 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 10:58 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 23:02 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Adrian Ratnapala <adrian.ratnapala@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 02:59 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-08-25 05:28 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Adrian Ratnapala <adrian.ratnapala@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 07:45 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-25 12:12 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-08-25 05:33 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-25 16:57 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 23:22 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-26 10:46 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-25 11:00 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 23:31 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-26 01:57 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-08-25 13:58 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 23:36 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-08-25 22:50 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-26 10:42 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 04:27 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Chicken McNuggets <chicken@mcnuggets.com> - 2012-09-01 11:35 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2012-09-02 00:52 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-01 23:21 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 23:16 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 22:59 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 22:55 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-24 00:45 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-24 04:17 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-24 04:47 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-08-24 06:33 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-25 06:47 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-25 23:58 -0600
Alternatives to Windows APIs in Metro style apps "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-24 04:20 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language superpollo <superpollo@tznvy.pbz> - 2012-08-24 12:38 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language rashid <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-08-25 21:09 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-26 01:40 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language rashid <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-08-27 20:58 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-27 17:12 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 22:25 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-27 15:03 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-27 15:35 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-28 01:13 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-28 01:30 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 22:46 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-28 09:12 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-01 23:26 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-09-02 09:59 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 02:44 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-09-02 11:40 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-02 03:10 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 05:05 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-09-03 00:32 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-03 01:16 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-29 01:03 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 22:28 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language rashid <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-08-28 18:25 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2012-08-28 20:35 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language William Ahern <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2012-08-28 11:55 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-28 21:11 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-28 21:39 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.invalid> - 2012-08-28 22:29 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-28 23:09 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.invalid> - 2012-08-28 23:16 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-28 23:27 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-28 17:24 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-28 23:37 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-28 14:37 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-28 23:39 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-29 00:15 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-29 01:54 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-28 17:15 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-29 02:27 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-08-29 10:01 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-29 10:54 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-08-29 13:47 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-08-29 07:57 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-29 16:20 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-08-29 12:32 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-29 20:28 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 14:51 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-29 21:11 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 15:32 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-29 21:47 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-29 23:01 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca> - 2012-08-29 19:27 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-29 21:30 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 15:44 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca> - 2012-08-29 20:07 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-29 23:06 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-08-29 08:21 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-29 15:37 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-29 15:59 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-29 16:27 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 11:02 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-29 11:42 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 14:52 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 07:27 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language rashid <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-08-29 20:00 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 16:36 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-29 23:12 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-08-29 21:47 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-29 17:51 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-30 03:07 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-29 21:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-30 11:40 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-30 04:00 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-30 13:55 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-30 13:47 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2012-08-30 23:24 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-08-30 02:40 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-29 17:46 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-29 18:25 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-30 13:43 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-08-30 03:37 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-30 08:28 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-31 05:29 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-31 11:57 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-30 14:20 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-30 06:39 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-30 20:08 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-30 22:51 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-31 01:04 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-31 11:42 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-30 16:33 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-31 12:29 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-31 04:40 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-08-31 17:26 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-31 08:50 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-08-31 12:46 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2012-08-31 20:17 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-31 14:41 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2012-09-01 00:11 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-02 12:48 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2012-09-02 20:39 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-09-02 17:07 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-03 12:22 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-02 20:49 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-02 18:58 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Paul J Gans <gansno@panix.com> - 2012-09-03 02:15 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-02 22:10 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-09-03 10:16 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-03 12:10 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-03 13:06 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-04 12:16 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-04 12:24 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-09-04 20:14 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-04 17:38 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Edek Pienkowski <edek.pienkowski@gmail.com> - 2012-09-04 19:34 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-04 16:46 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Edek Pienkowski <edek.pienkowski@gmail.com> - 2012-09-05 08:26 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-09-02 13:40 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-02 15:30 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-09-02 16:05 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-02 17:01 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-09-02 17:21 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-02 21:17 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-09-03 00:24 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-09-02 18:06 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-03 11:07 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-09-02 18:36 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-09-02 20:38 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-02 20:00 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-03 11:25 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-09-03 11:52 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-31 11:56 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-01 13:45 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-01 12:29 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-01 22:47 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-02 12:41 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-01 22:46 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-31 14:08 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-01 11:54 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-02 20:05 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-03 08:55 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-03 11:43 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-04 09:25 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-09-04 17:50 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-09-04 19:32 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-09-04 22:58 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-09-04 22:09 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-05 10:13 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-09-05 08:59 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-09-05 07:57 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-06 17:30 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-06 13:16 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-07 07:13 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-06 21:25 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-09-06 15:18 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-07 00:42 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-09-07 11:28 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-07 22:44 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-09-07 18:59 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-08 01:10 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-09-07 22:45 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-09-08 05:18 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-08 14:29 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-09-08 07:16 -0700
Re: Reâ: â¬Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-08 15:58 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-08 17:39 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-09-08 10:21 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-08 22:29 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-09-08 15:04 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-09 00:24 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-07 20:47 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-06 17:22 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-06 13:12 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-09-06 08:51 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-06 16:57 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-09-07 19:40 +0300
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-07 22:46 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2012-09-10 17:02 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-09-10 22:49 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2012-09-11 11:13 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-09-10 22:44 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-07 07:18 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-06 21:11 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-06 16:57 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-07 02:27 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-09-06 15:40 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-09-08 09:54 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-09-08 01:23 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-09-10 10:48 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-02 14:29 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-03 11:49 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-09-02 15:15 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-31 21:58 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-31 14:02 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-09-02 12:55 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-02 19:21 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-01 22:44 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Don't make my brown eyes China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-09-01 21:56 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 01:48 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-03 02:04 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-02 19:07 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-08-31 11:57 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-31 11:05 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-08-31 21:10 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-31 11:54 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-30 08:02 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-28 14:57 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language superpollo <superpollo@tznvy.pbz> - 2012-08-28 21:19 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language ais523 <ais523@bham.ac.uk> - 2012-08-28 22:07 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-28 14:36 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-29 09:40 +1200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-28 17:13 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-29 01:01 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 22:26 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Chicken McNuggets <chicken@mcnuggets.com> - 2012-09-02 12:28 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-25 16:48 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language timprince <tprince@computer.org> - 2012-08-25 23:20 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-25 20:55 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-26 02:24 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-26 10:45 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 03:13 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Tim Prince <tprince@nospamcomputer.org> - 2012-08-26 11:01 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-26 13:53 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 21:54 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 22:46 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-27 08:52 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 01:16 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-27 11:24 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 04:07 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-08-27 13:09 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-08-27 09:17 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-08-27 16:36 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 22:02 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 22:18 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-08-28 13:14 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-28 10:03 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2012-08-31 17:44 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 01:12 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-09-03 11:39 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-09-03 11:22 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-09-03 12:54 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-28 19:47 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 01:34 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-27 01:26 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 02:53 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 01:36 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-02 03:17 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 04:37 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 00:35 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-26 11:00 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 03:16 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-26 11:06 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 05:02 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-08-26 15:14 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language superpollo <superpollo@tznvy.pbz> - 2012-08-26 15:22 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 22:35 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 01:38 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language s0suk3@gmail.com - 2012-08-27 10:56 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-27 21:21 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2012-08-28 02:42 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language s0suk3@gmail.com - 2012-08-27 20:02 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-28 10:51 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-08-28 03:52 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-28 12:47 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2012-08-28 18:25 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language s0suk3@gmail.com - 2012-08-29 11:25 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-08-26 11:06 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 22:01 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-29 07:33 -0400
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 00:13 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-08-26 11:17 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-08-26 14:22 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-26 22:30 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2012-08-26 22:43 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 00:32 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2012-08-27 01:02 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-27 01:42 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 03:00 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-08-28 10:49 +0100
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-28 04:14 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-28 04:18 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-08-27 10:56 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 03:40 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2012-08-27 04:05 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-08-27 15:13 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 23:47 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-28 09:16 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-28 01:48 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-28 14:10 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-28 17:14 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 01:45 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-09-02 10:01 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> - 2012-09-02 02:54 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-08-27 13:45 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-27 23:28 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-08-27 13:58 -0500
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> - 2012-08-28 00:20 -0600
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Adrian Ratnapala <adrian.ratnapala@gmail.com> - 2012-08-26 15:24 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Jens Stuckelberger <Jens_Stuckelberger@nowhere.net> - 2012-08-27 00:48 +0000
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-09-13 19:46 +0200
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2012-09-13 13:32 -0700
Re: Microsoft abandons the C language Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-09-13 20:39 +0000
Page 19 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 17 18 [19] 20 Next page →
| From | Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 01:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <97f76bf1-c111-4ac2-8619-a6f05a6e8440@a11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #25066 |
On Aug 27, 7:32 am, "Ansel" <tinker...@trytospammenowloser.com> wrote: > Tiib wrote: > > On Monday, August 27, 2012 7:30:14 AM UTC+3, Ansel wrote: > >> Citation needed. > > > Is it here Wikipedia or USENET? Sure, Microsoft also sells Tools > > (like SQL servers and crap) besides Windows and Office. The MS > > revenues split about 30%/30%/30% for Tools/Office/Windows and rest of > > the business is below 10%. For citations just google for MS revenues > > reports, it is public enterprise. > > Nope. I'm not going to do someone else's research for them. That is hardly a > common household fact, so if someone makes some statement like that, they > need to provide the source of the information. IOW, don't waste the reader's > time, and also don't expect anyone to "just believe" you. its pretty damn easy to find though http://www.tannerhelland.com/2962/where-does-microsoft-make-its-money-2010/ > > How lot of code in the things that MS sells is C, does not matter. > > Some crucial parts certainly are written in C. > > That would be, then, a non-substantive claim that Stephen made about MS's > products being written in C (read, a waste of bandwidth to even type in the > first place). But you're not the one who said it, so we'll have to wait for > Stephen's reply. > > > > > The claim that entertainment and public services are mostly to > > polarize sheep around the core Tools/Office/Windows business is just > > elementary logic applied. > > He didn't say that, and it's not. Let's wait for him to reply instead of you > doing the talking for him, OK? > > > Where one should get citations about their > > business strategy? All you see in the open are the tactic they run > > and that looks like what Stephen Sprunk said. > > With all the hot air and sensationalism in this group, it's not worth even > saying vacuous statements like that to begin with (though it does fit right > in!). What Stephen wrote about "Every other MS product" is unsubstantiated > spew, and it's not even remotely plausible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 03:00 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1fctt$bk5$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25077 |
Nick Keighley wrote: > On Aug 27, 7:32 am, "Ansel" <tinker...@trytospammenowloser.com> wrote: >> Tiib wrote: >>> On Monday, August 27, 2012 7:30:14 AM UTC+3, Ansel wrote: >>>> Citation needed. >> >>> Is it here Wikipedia or USENET? Sure, Microsoft also sells Tools >>> (like SQL servers and crap) besides Windows and Office. The MS >>> revenues split about 30%/30%/30% for Tools/Office/Windows and rest >>> of the business is below 10%. For citations just google for MS >>> revenues reports, it is public enterprise. >> >> Nope. I'm not going to do someone else's research for them. That is >> hardly a common household fact, so if someone makes some statement >> like that, they need to provide the source of the information. IOW, >> don't waste the reader's time, and also don't expect anyone to "just >> believe" you. > > its pretty damn easy to find though > http://www.tannerhelland.com/2962/where-does-microsoft-make-its-money-2010/ > > It's not valid for the citation I called for though. You'd have to go back a few posts in the thread to see to what "Citation needed." was being applied to (which Tiib conveniently snipped to which he then provided non-relevant information).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-28 10:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k1i47g$spr$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25082 |
Ansel wrote: >> its pretty damn easy to find though >> http://www.tannerhelland.com/2962/where-does-microsoft-make-its- money-2010/ >> >> > > It's not valid for the citation I called for though. You'd have to go back > a few posts in the thread to see to what "Citation needed." was being > applied to (which Tiib conveniently snipped to which he then provided > non-relevant information). You did wrote this: <quote> > Also, don't forget that Microsoft only has two profitable products, > Windows and Office, Citation needed. </quote> The link that Nick Keighley provided is a detailed description of where Microsoft earns its money and what product lines are responsible for that. Your attempt to blindly label a reference as "not valid", without even looking into it and in spite of corroborating a specific statement that you called into question, leads me to believe that you aren't really interested in facts, and instead you are here specifically to put up a staunch defense of all which is Microsoft, no matter what it costs and on what nonsense it is based on. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-28 04:14 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1i5lh$102$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25211 |
Rui Maciel wrote: > Ansel wrote: > >>> its pretty damn easy to find though >>> http://www.tannerhelland.com/2962/where-does-microsoft-make-its- >>> money-2010/ >>> >>> >> >> It's not valid for the citation I called for though. You'd have to >> go back a few posts in the thread to see to what "Citation needed." >> was being applied to (which Tiib conveniently snipped to which he >> then provided non-relevant information). > > You did wrote this: > > <quote> >> Also, don't forget that Microsoft only has two profitable products, >> Windows and Office, > > Citation needed. > </quote> > > > The link that Nick Keighley provided is a detailed description of > where Microsoft earns its money and what product lines are > responsible for that. > > Your attempt Whoa, I am doing what? > to blindly label a reference as "not valid", without ever I am blind? and "without ever"? > > looking into it]]] and in spite of corroborating a specific statement > that you called into question, leads me to believe that you aren't > really interested in facts, and instead you are here specifically to > put up a staunch defense of all which is Microsoft, no matter what it > costs and on what nonsense it is based on. OK. I accept that completely.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-28 04:18 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1i5rq$1gg$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25211 |
Rui Maciel wrote: Don't dare me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 10:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <eaidnao6iYP5q6bNnZ2dnUVZ8rKdnZ2d@lyse.net> |
| In reply to | #25066 |
On 27/08/2012 08:32, Ansel wrote: > Öö Tiib wrote: >> On Monday, August 27, 2012 7:30:14 AM UTC+3, Ansel wrote: >>> Citation needed. >> >> Is it here Wikipedia or USENET? Sure, Microsoft also sells Tools >> (like SQL servers and crap) besides Windows and Office. The MS >> revenues split about 30%/30%/30% for Tools/Office/Windows and rest of >> the business is below 10%. For citations just google for MS revenues >> reports, it is public enterprise. > The divisions they use has varied a little over the years, giving different splits. > Nope. I'm not going to do someone else's research for them. That is hardly a > common household fact, so if someone makes some statement like that, they > need to provide the source of the information. IOW, don't waste the reader's > time, and also don't expect anyone to "just believe" you. > A 10 second google search gives this: <http://betanews.com/2012/01/19/microsoft-q2-2012-by-the-numbers-windows-revenue-falls-6/> From that, MS revenues are 30% Windows, 23% Server/tools, 30% Business, 3.8% Online services, and 20% Entertainment / Devices. As percentages of total income, business (Office etc.) gives 46% of the income, Windows gives 31%, and Server/tools gives 22%. Entertainment is actually profitable after many years of loses, for 6%, while online services are 5% loss. I don't know what use you will make of this data, but you asked for it, so I hope it makes you feel better.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 03:40 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1ff7i$hro$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25080 |
David Brown wrote: > On 27/08/2012 08:32, Ansel wrote: >> Öö Tiib wrote: >>> On Monday, August 27, 2012 7:30:14 AM UTC+3, Ansel wrote: >>>> Citation needed. >>> >>> Is it here Wikipedia or USENET? Sure, Microsoft also sells Tools >>> (like SQL servers and crap) besides Windows and Office. The MS >>> revenues split about 30%/30%/30% for Tools/Office/Windows and rest >>> of the business is below 10%. For citations just google for MS >>> revenues reports, it is public enterprise. >> > > The divisions they use has varied a little over the years, giving > different splits. > >> Nope. I'm not going to do someone else's research for them. That is >> hardly a common household fact, so if someone makes some statement >> like that, they need to provide the source of the information. IOW, >> don't waste the reader's time, and also don't expect anyone to "just >> believe" you. > > A 10 second google search gives this: > > <http://betanews.com/2012/01/19/microsoft-q2-2012-by-the-numbers-windows-revenue-falls-6/> You and others are missing the message for Tiib's inappropriately snipping and for me not retyping all the nouns. When I said, "That is hardly a common household fact", I was referring to this: Oh, Tiib was grasping the low-hanging fruit perhaps (I think after going back and reading my post which Tiib snipped). Time-out. Here is the context: "> Also, don't forget that Microsoft only has two profitable products, > Windows and Office, Citation needed. > and both are written in C. 100% C? Citation needed. > Every other MS product > exists only to generate more demand for Windows and/or Office. Citation needed." The first one, well Stephen should count the number of products MS actually has (100? more?). Then he needs to substantiate his "MS has only 2 profitable products" statement). The second one makes it sound like the producs are written mostly, if not completely in C, to which I said: "prove it", because I don't believe it and I think most would also find it absurd. (See more discussion at the end of this post). The third one is the one I thought Tiib was replying on. I could have expounded and said more, such as, "Do you really think that MS Project exists just to generate MS Office revenue"? OK, so now everyone should be on the same page. > > From that, MS revenues are 30% Windows, 23% Server/tools, 30% > Business, 3.8% Online services, and 20% Entertainment / Devices. > > As percentages of total income, business (Office etc.) gives 46% of > the income, Windows gives 31%, and Server/tools gives 22%. Entertainment > is actually profitable after many years of loses, for > 6%, while online services are 5% loss. > > I don't know what use you will make of this data, but you asked for > it, so I hope it makes you feel better. Well, there are products and then there are business divisions. Under business division called "Windows" are products. Under business division "Office" are products. To make is sound like only 2 real *products* are making a product is simply incorrect because "Windows", e.g., is not just one product. A better example is Office for there is way different functionalities: word processing, project management, database, etc. If I had a company with 10 divisions but only one was making a profit, but it had 10 profitable products while the other divisions only had one each but were not making a profit, would you go on and say that my company had 9 unprofitable products and 1 profitable product? Stephen's assertions are vacuous (but his post was maybe just a *thoughtless* posting) without substantiation. I think all three of his assertions are false (the second one maybe not literally 100% false, but I'd hypothesize (not guess, mind you) that there is a large percentage of C++ code in MS products and that C++ has replaced a lot of C code over the years). Is everyone clear now?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 04:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <78f3560f-01ec-48f2-bceb-7b4fcb74930a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #25089 |
On Monday, August 27, 2012 12:40:09 PM UTC+3, Ansel wrote: > Well, there are products and then there are business divisions. Under > business division called "Windows" are products. You mean products like "Windows 7 Premium", "Windows 7 Professional", "Windows 7 Ultimate"? These consist of mostly same files and others are just crippled versions of "Windows 7 Ultimate". Typical marketing trick. > Under business division "Office" are products. To make is sound like only 2 > real *products* are making a product is simply incorrect because "Windows", > e.g., is not just one product. What it is then? Sure it contains several modules but that's normal about any software sold those days. > A better example is Office for there is way different > functionalities: word processing, project management, database, etc. Yes, and the functionality is done by different modules of one product "Office Professional Plus 2010". What is so unusual about typical modular design of a product? Rest of the "products" they sell are again just crippled versions of that product. Maybe you are distracted by fact that these modules were one day different products like Word and Excel, but now those are integrated together into single product. > If I had a company with 10 divisions but only one was making a profit, but > it had 10 profitable products while the other divisions only had one each > but were not making a profit, would you go on and say that my company had > 9 unprofitable products and 1 profitable product? You are stretching it and pretending that you do not understand what you talk about. What other products? You mean older versions of same products? Or versions of same SW compiled and bundled for different hardware platforms? > Stephen's assertions are vacuous (but his post was maybe just a > *thoughtless* posting) without substantiation. I think all three of his > assertions are false (the second one maybe not literally 100% false, but I'd > hypothesize (not guess, mind you) that there is a large percentage of C++ > code in MS products and that C++ has replaced a lot of C code over the > years). Initially (first versions) were certainly mostly C and some Assembler. Why only C++? They still write Assembler and C and also they use C# now. Rewriting something written in good C as C++ is lot more pointless and also lot more expensive than you seem to think.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 15:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <k1gkdd$663$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25089 |
On 27-Aug-12 04:40, Ansel wrote: > Well, there are products and then there are business divisions. Under > business division called "Windows" are products. Under business division > "Office" are products. Actually, Microsoft sets up their divisions by market, each of which make several products targeted at those markets--and share products, eg. Windows is sold by the divisions targeting consumers, businesses, etc., but packaged differently for each. > To make is sound like only 2 real *products* are making a product is > simply incorrect because "Windows", e.g., is not just > one product. I think the term you are looking for is "product lines", and yes, the Windows and Office product _lines_ contain several different products. The point was to distinguish those two products (product lines, to be precise) from the rest of what Microsoft sells, and that was obvious from the context. > If I had a company with 10 divisions but only one was making a > profit, but it had 10 profitable products while the other divisions > only had one each but were not making a profit, would you go on and > say that my company had 9 unprofitable products and 1 profitable > product? Microsoft has five divisions. One division sells Office at a profit--and a bunch of other products at a loss. Three divisions sell Windows at a profit--and a bunch of other products at a loss. Within these divisions, the strategy is to develop satellite products which lose money but increase the sales of that division's profitable Windows/Office products for a net gain. This "loss leader" business model has been around (and complained about) for at least a century, and probably much longer than that--and it works. The fifth division exists solely to fight Google and loses ridiculous amounts of money--because it sells neither Windows nor Office. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 23:47 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1hlvk$r07$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25130 |
Stephen Sprunk wrote: > On 27-Aug-12 04:40, Ansel wrote: >> Well, there are products and then there are business divisions. Under >> business division called "Windows" are products. Under business >> division "Office" are products. > > Actually, SHUT UP!!! You tried to make it look like MS had 2 profitable products. Enough is enough. I know you f'd up and just shot of a NG post, but now you're trying to defend it? OK, noted: you're a hen-pecked "husband, kinda-a-man-or-something-but-my-wife-won't-let-me"? Stop typing and put your wife online. Um, I mean, let her type here if she is actually "the man behind the man". (God forbid we'd have to endure *your* existence by seeing her fat ass!). Dude, I'm not here to say "I told you so", but I'm also not here to sacrifice for your mistakes. (I am making up for missing Friday, cuz I was working). ;) > Microsoft sets up their divisions by market, each of which > make several products targeted at those markets--and share products, > eg. Windows is sold by the divisions targeting consumers, businesses, > etc., but packaged differently for each. > And there was some relevance in typing that? (I'm tough). >> To make is sound like only 2 real *products* are making a product is >> simply incorrect because "Windows", e.g., is not just >> one product. > > I think the term you are looking for is "product lines", Hello. No. You said "products". OK, "I get it", most people here are "dipping their toes" into adulthood/reality, and I'm "stupid" for addressing everyone here as mature and intelligent adults? > and yes, the > Windows and Office product _lines_ contain several different products. > OK. I recognize now that the problem needs a solution. Ha! That was a lie! (Hmm keith?). > The point was to distinguish those two products (product lines, to be > precise) No, no. If you are that lucy-goosey, maybe programming is not your fortition. I didn't call you out. I gave you vehicle to contextualize your post. You chose to "regroup and armor". > from the rest of what Microsoft sells, and that was obvious > from the context. > It would seem, then, that either I am an idiot, or you are a liar.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-28 09:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <503C7066.7040709@loria.fr> |
| In reply to | #25186 |
Am 28.08.2012 07:47, schrieb Ansel: > Stephen Sprunk wrote: > SHUT UP!!! you seem to have run out of arguments here I have already seen quite a number of "interesting" people in NG, but I rarely have seen somebody as rude as you. Jens
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-28 01:48 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1ht23$ang$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25196 |
Jens Gustedt wrote: > Am 28.08.2012 07:47, schrieb Ansel: >> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> SHUT UP!!! > > you seem to have run out of arguments here > > I have already seen quite a number of "interesting" people in NG, but > I rarely have seen somebody as rude as you. > > Jens Insulting are you? Don't you worry your ugly head. I'm not here to save you. Your "attitude" is history. I don't like it. Make your point. Wage your war. Else shut up. (Well, no, don't fester it: you're a dick and your mommie loves you.. ). Psychopathic "society". (What I learned from clc?). :P Next.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-28 14:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <k1ijfo$884$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25196 |
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:16:54 +0200, Jens Gustedt wrote: > Am 28.08.2012 07:47, schrieb Ansel: >> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> SHUT UP!!! > > you seem to have run out of arguments here > > I have already seen quite a number of "interesting" people in NG, but I > rarely have seen somebody as rude as you. Welcome to Usenet, Jens. This is hardly a feature of this ng specifically. My suggestion, which you can treat as you like, is to have a sort of "black list" and "white list". Those who (in your opinion) add nothing to the conversation, you simply ignore, whether automatically through your newsreader or manually. Those who are nearly always worth reading, you look for first, especially when time is short. The rest, read when you have the time, not when you don't. My own lists would be of little value to you, and possibly insult/compliment some here without purpose, but I can say that there are regulars to this group in each.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-28 17:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <503CE045.1040208@loria.fr> |
| In reply to | #25246 |
Am 28.08.2012 16:10, schrieb BruceS: > On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:16:54 +0200, Jens Gustedt wrote: > >> Am 28.08.2012 07:47, schrieb Ansel: >>> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >>> SHUT UP!!! >> >> you seem to have run out of arguments here >> >> I have already seen quite a number of "interesting" people in NG, but I >> rarely have seen somebody as rude as you. > > Welcome to Usenet, Jens. This is hardly a feature of this ng > specifically. My suggestion, which you can treat as you like, is to have > a sort of "black list" and "white list". Those who (in your opinion) add > nothing to the conversation, you simply ignore, whether automatically > through your newsreader or manually. Those who are nearly always worth > reading, you look for first, especially when time is short. The rest, > read when you have the time, not when you don't. My own lists would be > of little value to you, and possibly insult/compliment some here without > purpose, but I can say that there are regulars to this group in each. Bruce, thanks, but that is (basically) what I already do. But often there is not such a clear cut, some of these egos all of a sudden are able to produce valid contributions. And I have taken the habit to mark such things when they are directed towards me personally. Just to not to leave the impression that I pretend to not having seen it and also to ensure that anybody notices. Jens
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-09-02 01:45 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1v2oj$e4t$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25196 |
Jens Gustedt wrote: > Am 28.08.2012 07:47, schrieb Ansel: >> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> SHUT UP!!! > > you seem to have run out of arguments here You are replacing Stephen but *I* have run out of "arguments to justify his spew"? > > I have already seen quite a number of "interesting" people in NG, but > I rarely have seen somebody as rude as you. Oh, you're that guy that got in-between me and that girl at the bar? Wouldn't that make you a fucking punk? Answer the fucking question, punk.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-09-02 10:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <5043124D.4040507@loria.fr> |
| In reply to | #25737 |
Am 02.09.2012 09:45, schrieb Anse: > Oh, you're that guy that got in-between me and that girl at the bar? so you got drunk? That explains it. Jens
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Anse" <blankone23@framebuilder.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-09-02 02:54 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1v6pq$n5l$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25740 |
Jens Gustedt wrote: > Am 02.09.2012 09:45, schrieb Anse: >> Oh, you're that guy that got in-between me and that girl at the bar? > > so you got drunk? That explains it. > Prove it. Punk. Prove what that explains, punk. I'm not calling you out, punk. Not a fucking all, punk. You got a second wind chance at me? I have nothing better to do than to beat your fucking ass into a pulp. And the next time you do that, <>.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 13:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <k1gf8u$2ln$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25060 |
On 26-Aug-12 23:30, Ansel wrote: > Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> And don't kid yourself; Microsoft knows that having an unchanging (if >> imperfect) API is the key to their market success. The day they >> abandon Win32 (which, itself, is just an adaptation of Win16) is the >> day they hand the desktop market to their competitors. > > While it may lead to investigation of other platforms and some may go, it > hardly means, as you said, that everyone would jump ship. Moving to a 100% > new way of developing and delivering software vs. a new way of coding > Windows, is extremely different. Like moving from a US state to another > country vs. moving to another US state. > > This is, of course, as obvious as your post was sensationalistic. I don't find it sensational; everyone who looks into the business side of how Microsoft works comes to the same conclusions, and they're common knowledge in the industry by now. >> Microsoft _does_ promote other proprietary languages/environments, but >> largely towards its corporate customers and potential competitors, who >> they _want_ to see locked into Windows and Microsoft development >> tools. Most important, by pushing a succession of new languages and >> SDKs, and then deprecating each a few years later, they force >> potential competitors to waste time constantly rewriting their code >> just to stay in the same place, while Microsoft's own products move >> ahead. > > While I don't know if that is their M.O., You can quibble over their motivations for doing so, but their track record clearly demonstrates that _is_ what they're doing. Once or twice I could chalk up to a mistake, but their patterns of behavior is consistent enough to be considered deliberate. They're not idiots; if they wanted to do something different, they would. >> Most of the "incompetence" people bash Microsoft for is actually very >> shrewd marketing. Bad news for customers, good news for Microsoft's >> shareholders. > > Microsoft is "a leader" because people *follow* them. I wonder if that > surprises "them" as much as it surprises me. Are you really a "leader" if your "followers" are a chain gang? S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ansel" <tinker454@trytospammenowloser.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 23:28 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1hksa$oph$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #25121 |
Stephen Sprunk wrote: > On 26-Aug-12 23:30, Ansel wrote: >> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >>> And don't kid yourself; Microsoft knows that having an unchanging >>> (if imperfect) API is the key to their market success. The day they >>> abandon Win32 (which, itself, is just an adaptation of Win16) is the >>> day they hand the desktop market to their competitors. >> >> While it may lead to investigation of other platforms and some may >> go, it hardly means, as you said, that everyone would jump ship. >> Moving to a 100% new way of developing and delivering software vs. a >> new way of coding Windows, is extremely different. Like moving from >> a US state to another country vs. moving to another US state. >> >> This is, of course, as obvious as your post was sensationalistic. > > I don't find it sensational; Well then I am bored, and "disappointed". I'm serious about this stuff, and you're just a bullshitter (or a wanker). > everyone who looks into the business side > of how Microsoft works comes to the same conclusions, Citation required. > and they're > common knowledge in the industry by now. What does that mean? Are you frustrated? Feeling oppressed? Do you hate Microsoft? Jim Gates? What does that mean?! > >>> Microsoft _does_ That is true. Umm, .. did you mean *IT* does, or *THEY* do? Please clarify. >>> promote other proprietary languages/environments, "other proprietary"? You're supposed to be programmers and careful at every character typed, yet you write obtuse English? Oh wait, someone in this thread suggested that clc was just a hangout for programmers and nothing should be taken seriously as this is not a place to talk tech or science, but rather to... what? Masturbate? My bad? >>> but largely towards its corporate customers and potential >>> competitors, who they _want_ to see locked into Windows and >>> Microsoft development tools. "Communism vs. capitalism"? That kind of quip may "place" you in your time. >>> Most important, Oh, OK.. ears perked now for this "most important" thought. >>> by pushing Who pushed whom? >>> a >>> succession of new languages and SDKs, And wouldn't *that* concept be in opposition to "K&R C is all we or anyone will ever need". >>> and then deprecating each a >>> few years later, they force potential competitors to waste time >>> constantly rewriting their code just to stay in the same place, >>> while Microsoft's own products move ahead. "they force potential competitors"? Would you like to think about that some more (I probably don't have that much time left for you to do that, but hey)? As I don't have all the time you have, I will offer some assistance: <lol, I forgot what I was going to write! I must be *senile*!>. >> >> While I don't know if that is their M.O., > > You can quibble Are you suggesting that I am "quibbling"? With whom? You? Whom? Do tell. > over their motivations for doing so You mean that you *wish* I was so that you would have something to do? >, but their track > record clearly demonstrates "clearly". Irrefutably (sp). So let it be written, then, that clearly, not everyone signed "the declaration of independence", but nary that, who gives a shit about that, "the constitution" is much more important (sad to say). > that _is_ what they're doing. I missed it, please "reitterate". What are *they* doing? Platform yours, do tell (don't "blow it", this is your big chance!). > Once or > twice I could chalk up to a mistake, but their patterns of behavior is > consistent enough to be considered deliberate. They're not idiots; if > they wanted to do something different, they would. You mean, "if they really *wanted* to be in our college fraternity, they would not puke when a gallon of vodka was poured down their throat after being bound and gagged by the "clearly" superior regime"? > >>> Most of the "incompetence" people bash Microsoft for is actually >>> very shrewd marketing. Bad news for customers, good news for >>> Microsoft's shareholders. >> >> Microsoft is "a leader" because people *follow* them. I wonder if >> that surprises "them" as much as it surprises me. > > Are you really a "leader" if your "followers" are a chain gang? Ironic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-08-27 13:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <k1gg0j$7mh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #25060 |
On 26-Aug-12 23:30, Ansel wrote: > Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> Also, don't forget that Microsoft only has two profitable products, >> Windows and Office, > > Citation needed. Look at Microsoft's own financial reports, as referenced by others. >> and both are written in C. > > 100% C? 100%? I doubt it. But that's the primary language, i.e. that of the core product features. The flowery stuff around the edges, which changes in every release, may well be in another language. > Citation needed. Statements from several current or former employees of Microsoft who work(ed) on those products. >> Every other MS product exists only to generate more demand for >> Windows and/or Office. > > Citation needed. Explicit statements from both Gates and Ballmer on the topic. Yes, I know none of the above are specific citations that would be acceptable in an academic paper, but they are solid enough for me to be comfortable with my position--especially since I have never seen even an _unsupported_ claim to the contrary. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 19 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 17 18 [19] 20 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web