> and C++/MFC guys out there for whom it would take a significant amount of
> time to move to something else. In their cases, they might need more than
> a
> few percentage points in additional market share.
>
Obviously if you are programming in Java or .NET (thanks to Mono) there
really is no work. If you are using C++ (MFC or not) there are plenty of
cross-platform toolkits to get you there will little effort.
> I use Dreamweaver MX 2004, MS Office 2003, and Adobe Acrobat Professional
> 6
> on a pretty regular basis. My mail client is Outlook 2003, with a local
> OST
> mirror of my Exchange mailbox. This local OST is approximately 2GB. I also
> have about 3GB of PST content on here that I access occasionally. I use
> VS.NET 2003 pretty regularly now, as I'm very interested in .NET Compact
> Framework stuff right now. Fortunately, I don't have to use all these
> things
> at once either, although Outlook is pretty much running 24/7.
>
If you aren't running everything at once then you have to spend time
starting and stopping things, which slows you down. It seems to me anything
that slows me down should be avoided especially when it can be easily solved
by buying a new piece of hardware.
You wouldn't advocate spending more time writing a faster web application
when you can just throw more hardware at it and save money overall, so I
think the same thing applies here.
> Perhaps in your case; I can't speak for you. I suspect that there are
> plenty
> of other developers for whom my description is accurate. I suspect you
> might
> be an outlier.
>
I would hope most developers would be above that.
> I think the word you're looking for is "administer", but ok, whatever. I
> have plenty of reasons why I still use Windows, but the primary one is
> that
> it does everything I need it to do.
>
What about all the things it does that you don't want it do?
-Matt
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
