Re: VBclassic petition
- From: "Dan Barclay" <Dan@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 17:18:32 -0500
"alpine" <alpine_don'tsendspam@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>
> The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing a
> forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the existing
> code base.
Exactly: And the answer was/is "it will not happen."
As much as we don't want to believe that is true, it is. That,
unfortunately, leaves a shadow on all their development platforms. I've
learned my lesson again (again).
It's unlikely to happen to me again in the future as we're placing our eggs
in another basket. That's quite unfortunate. MS has some bright guys and a
lot of resources to put on projects.
Unfortunately, a well done bad project implementing a poor strategy is
pretty useless to me. Well, more than useless.
Dan
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: VBclassic petition
- From: Duane Bozarth
- Re: VBclassic petition
- From: Stefan Berglund
- Re: VBclassic petition
- From: Bob Butler
- Re: VBclassic petition
- References:
- VBclassic petition
- From: Martin
- Re: VBclassic petition
- From: Duane Bozarth
- Re: VBclassic petition
- From: Bruno Köller
- Re: VBclassic petition
- From: alpine
- VBclassic petition
- Prev by Date: Re: Using "Include" Approach for Repetitive Code...
- Next by Date: Re: VBclassic petition
- Previous by thread: Re: VBclassic petition
- Next by thread: Re: VBclassic petition
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|