[Sussex] The Art of Unix Programming

[nik at wired4life.org]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:08:59PM -0000, Mark Harrison wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <nik at wired4life.org>
> To: "LUG email list for the Sussex Counties" <sussex at mailman.lug.org.uk>
> Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 4:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sussex] The Art of Unix Programming
> > Unix programming is better, its had a long time, a wide distribution and
> > a larger development and user base than windows PERIOD.
> 
> OK - I'll bite :-)
> 
> Unix programming has a larger development and user base that windows???
> 
> Saying PERIOD after something does not always make it true. Do you have a
> link to an independant site that has numbers for these things?

no, but then I was not using the word PERIOD  to signify
that the statement  was TRUE. nor was it intended to and I found it
inflamatory that you'd try to pull my conversation into that direction
<grin>. Honestly Mark do try to stay on topic. If you need a education
in the use of PERIOD got back to writting for the modern english
language 101. A better swipe would be to point out that I used a period
after PERIOD.


> It's interesting. In my MBA, I was taught that the difference between sales
> and marketing was that Sales was persuading customers to take your product,
> and Marketing was listening to what customers actually wanted.
hmmm no thats the other way round. which is why a sales man who listens
is more effective than a sales man who persuades. Thats selling 101.
Maybe you read the two chapters the wrong way around? In my uneducated (
oh were back to that one again ) experience listening in a sales meeting
wins sales.


> work well, but, as Geoff has so clearly outlined, only if you play to their
> strengths.
Ahhh, can we count the strengths then <grin>. Statements like playing to
their strengths evoke a feeling that the playing field is level, which
it certainly is not.  But seeing as we have not set the field im open to
interpretation of the field. Also I dont feel Geoff made that statement
clearly. No that I think he intended to but your comment leads to a
belivef that he might have inteded to.


> Trying to make *n?x work like Windows is just as bad as trying to make
> Windows work like *n?x. The key is programmer understanding of the target
> architecture.
but thats not the argument here, the argument is better programming
and better programmers. not making unix like windows and vice versa.


15 Love !



-- 
nik at wired4life.org	http://www.wired4life.org/	Wired4Life, an Answer.

10 Home 
20 Sweet
30 Goto 10