Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- From: "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 09:49:30 -0800
J French wrote:
Just as an aside, this morning I was reading the newspaper and saw one
of those stupid MS dinosaur advertizements.
For a change I read it carefully
- the jist was that they were trying to persuade corporates to upgrade
from Office 97
Maybe MS have some other problems, it makes one wonder ...
Definitely. They see the single biggest competitor to Office 2003 to be --
Office 2000! Their main problem is, they haven't offered anything new that
"real people" care about in at least that long. The only benefits to Office
2000 over earlier 95/97 versions is a newer build of VBA. So even corps
don't see any reason to update.
What's their answer? Break stuff! Just wait til you see the "interface" in
the next version. Yikes.
--
Working without a .NET?
http://classicvb.org/
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- From: Robert Comer
- Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- References:
- Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- From: Karl E. Peterson
- Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- From: Ken Halter
- Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- From: Stefan Berglund
- Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- From: J French
- Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- Prev by Date: Re: How can I create a large text file is an efficient way?
- Next by Date: Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- Previous by thread: Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- Next by thread: Re: VB.NET or C++.NET or C#
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
