I wrote 'Nuke Redmond'

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sun May 7 12:59:39 2000

That, sir, is my point, quite precisely put. I'm for defining a system the
primary goal of which is to accomplish eful work as easily as possible.
Software development is a task for systems tailored for software
development, and they don't do "useful work" as easily (for the people who
normally do it) as a system optimized for "useful work."

More below:

Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner <spc_at_armigeron.com>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2000 1:57 AM
Subject: Re: I wrote 'Nuke Redmond'


> It was thus said that the Great Richard Erlacher once stated:
> >
> > > This is the sickest aspect of the whole computer industry, ALL of the
> > > companies that made fairly good reliable products went under from the
> > flood
> > > of dollars the BAD heavily marketed software generated via updates.
> > >
> > Well, I wish a few more of them would go. I can't imagine what
companies,
> > now defunct, produced this set of "fairly good reliable products " have
gone
> > down the toilet because they were outspent or outmarketed by MS. An
example
> > or two would be nice.
>
> Borland? Oh that's right, you don't do software development. Umm ...
>
Yes, but as you've pointed out already, that case is ground-ruled out of
this discussion. I have used their products too, in fact since their
CP/M-based Turbo Pascal, and miss the no-nonsense approach they seem to have
taken with respect to almost everything they did.
>
> -spc (Hey, at least that's one ... )
>
Received on Sun May 07 2000 - 12:59:39 BST