[ale] OT: Re: posting to Linux mail list

[Greg]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org]On Behalf Of
> Geoffrey
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 9:21 PM
> To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
> Subject: Re: [ale] OT: Re: posting to Linux mail list
>
>
> Greg wrote:
> > Well, VB is cheap, easy , plenty of developers (I think it is the # 1
> >  language by number of developers) and did I mention it is cheap ?
>
> Cheap???  Let's see, what are the prereqs for running VB?  Oh, yeah, one
> of those M$ OS's, running about $200+ for one box.


If you already have it, then the cost is $0.00. That's it - nada, zilch,
nothing.
*IF* you want to buy into .NET, then it is a different story, but most
companies have already paid for their OS's.  Also, cheap refers to the
developer cost, also.


>
> > It interacts with other VB stuff (all of MS office) and it is
> > object-oriented (no, not object based).
>
> Oh, cheap again, let's see, MS Office, that's about $400.

Most companies have already paid for Office, unless they have fallen for
this silly "We must upgrade simply because we must have the latest"
philosophy.  Upgrading without a reason is silly, and I would say that the
majority of places dont' need to upgrade.

>
> > It can easily access and use
> > C++ and Windows API's is scalable to probably about 90% of what
> > business's require.
>
> I could say the same for perl and C.

perl and c can access Windows API's ?  And what gui do you use for perl ? I
don't know as I have only used it for small scripts on linux.


>
> > It is not a scripting language (like HTML)
>
> No, HTML is not a scripting language, it is a markup language.
>
> > but a
> > full development language.  It represents RAD at it's best and is
> > only as insecure as the coders make it. Many apps are not necessarily
> > networkable and many companies are not connected to the net (or
> > weren't), so the security thing is not a huge thing in some
> > instances.
>
> Scripting language is one that does not compile to a binary.  As I
> recall, VB requires an additional dll to run, thus it would be similar
> to Perl in that it needs an engine.  Correct me if I'm wrong, as I don't
> stay on top of the M$ stuff.

VB compiles to a binary, yes.


>
> > Rewriting is many times not an issue, as many clients will point out.
> >  Money, politics, and the what-if-Linux-changes (lib problems anyone
> > ?) points make re-writing not a choice for many businesses.
>
> Then they are not looking at the bigger picture, which is what too many
> companies do these days.

If you only need a few changes (or none at all) then do nothing. I would
only change if there is a reason.  Just because there is something else new
does not constitute a reason.

>
> > Whether facing a choice of changing to Linux or .NET or Java many
> > companies are doing what the 400 million users of Windows 98 are
> > doing - nothing.  If it ain't broke don't fix it. A trillion flashy
> > apps, connectivity crap, stuff that would never be used but is paid
> > for and such that are in the ads of many OS's are irrelevant to many
> > businesses.  MS has done well by them and outside of the occasional
> > HD failure they were/are/will continue to be ok.  They have already
> > paid for their licenses and really don't require much of anything
> > from any camp (Java/Open Source/Windows).  For these folk there just
> > simply is no reason to change.
>
> What?  What OS's does M$ now support?  I believe they've dumped 95/98
> right?  What about NT?  I think it's gone too.

I don't think that just because MS dumps an OS is reason for a company to
dump it also.  My wife will continue to run Windows 98. Yes, NT has gone to
(as the certs for it, even though many companys still use it).  RH, Suse,
and OpenBSD end of lifes stuff too, so if you want support, hire a small
consultant.

>
> So, no support for your OS.

Why not hire a small consultant (for less $) who will come on site as
opposed to some mega $$ MS/RH support contract.  Of course, if you hire good
folks, then you don't need a support contract so much.  It just varies. It
really does.

>
> You're description of 'flashy apps, connectivity crap, stuff that would
> never be used' sounds a lot like Microsoft OS, only worse.  Rather than
> a bunch of different apps, you've got this monolithic OS with crap stuck
> into it that shouldn't be there, like IE...

Yup.

>
> > Also, the point that you see little value of a GUI dev tool (which is
> > huge to me) is the point.  Just because I don't care about OCR or
> > other stuff does not mean that there are not those that do - and do
> > so to a large extent.  MS has many apps in these little niches that
> > Linux does not - and obviously vice-versa.
>
> I'd still like examples.  I mean, I've been working from a whole Linux
> shop for at least 5 years.
>
> > But to date, there is no
> > VB equivalent in the Linux community and the choices are really not
> > great for what there is (C++, tcl/tk, perl, etc etc) that has VB's
> > points.
>
> Perl can easily do pretty much all you've defined VB can do, and more. I
> can write to an Access db and create excel spreadsheets with Perl.  What
> other db engines (I know that's a stretch, calling Access a db) can VB
> write to?  Perl can write to: Oracle, Informix, Postgresql, Mysql,
> Access, and ODBC compliant DB.

As can VB (well, don't know about Postgresql these days)  I know this is
scary, but *a lot* of businesses still use Access.  Really - and they are
big businesses ... running apps that deal with folks $$$$.

>
> Who the hell really cares if you can VB with Word?  Who really does
> that?  Most  businesses use Word for just what it is, a word processor.

Many businesses. You can set up Word to work with databases for form letters
and such.  Need to set up a program to make letters based on business logic
? - use VBA.  It basically puts a nice face (Office) on programming. And you
can use the VBA object library to do neat stuff as opposed to writing more
code.  There is a whole developer community dedicated to programming in VBA
(VB for Applications). Remember Bill started out as a Basic programmer, so
yrs ago, MS move all Office apps to VB.  You can open up a dev environment
in Excel or Access and go at it, using the programs objects. I have seen
more Access and Excel apps, but Word, PowerPoint, and Outlook support this
(and thus the first security holes were born).


My overall point is that many businessess don't need to change to the latest
software (whether OS or MS based).  Change without reason is silly, though
using MS because it makes clients sleep better is better than suggesting an
OS solution and making folks uneasy.  The result is often throwing the OS
solution out (a write off of much $$$), a prejudice towards OS solutions,
and implementing a MS solution but with the loss in time and perhaps at a
greater cost, as often folks will use it as an excuse to buy an upgrade to
.NET (lock in hell as .NET is to change several times in the next couple of
yrs. But RH I think will do the same thing.) when they could have gotten
away with a few hours of a VB programmers time.



>
> --
> Until later, Geoffrey	esoteric at 3times25.net
>
> Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>