Re: For the Windoze haters - VS2005

Joel Kolstad wrote:
I do somewhat agree with your sentiment, though, that Microsoft and "the
computer industry" in general seem to try to force continued changes in
programming languages, development systems, etc., even when it doesn't seem as
though such changes objectively are any better, but are really just different.
(Microsoft Office being a good example here -- I'd estimate that for 90+% of
users, Office 97 works as well as Office 2005.) I honestly believe that they
do this to fuel the "IT economy," and thereby indirectly elevate their own
returns.

Your suspicions, IMO, are quite accurate. Old Bill learned long ago
that it really doesn't matter how the customers do it, so long as they
do it with much expense (but not so much to make the effort completely
worthless) and that it is done from something that came in a white box
with the Microsoft logo on it. In fact, as one CEO of another
multi-billion-dollar software pointed out recently at a conference,
"...well..if you think about it...it is actually to our advantage that
our products are a mess and redundant and confuse our customers. This
way they buy more of our stuff."

There is a fight raging over in the C++ moderated group
(http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated/browse_frm/thread/84253d37f970dd2b/d274f71b1aec4fd3?lnk=raot#d274f71b1aec4fd3)
about what Microsoft is trying to do toi C++. They have been trying
for years to shove this nasty thing called COM down programmers
throats. Their goal has been to eliminate *their* burden of having to
replicate their libraries in multiple languages. Around 1990, they
(Don Box and friends) came up with the the fundamentally flawed notion
that you could have one super-interface-thing that would allow you to
write a software component in one language, say, C++, and let the
BASIC, FORTRAN, etc. coders access that component from their respective
languages. Trust me, this is one of the stupidest things to ever come
from computer "science", but after billions spent and much
sledgehammering, it was bound to work somewhat so people went with it,
somewhat. But after a decade, the industry saw the resulting code and
realize that it looked and smelled like poo and that they were spending
a lot of time ant-f*cking (to use a Belgian expression) and so they
didn't bite as hard as Microsoft wanted. So Microsoft did some rework
and changed the name to COM+, which failed, then DCOM which failed
again, and lately, .NET, which is really, really cool because it has
the word "net" in it. Finally after contaminating the languages with
new syntax that made the code almost unrecognizable, they decided to
introduce an entirely new language to simultaneously attack Java from
the flanks and kill C++, and make people stop complaining about all the
poo that was creeping into their languages. Java lost a little bit of
ground, but the C++ programmers took one look and said, "Uh..no..we're
doing just fine."

The problem is that, arguably, the best programmers in the prefer C++
(and assembly). Microsoft's grand plan to trap the minds of the elite
won't work if the elite keeps rejecting their poo.

So now they are trying the ultimate. They are actually going around
to all the standards bodies that govern languages like C++ (ISO, ECMA)
and trying to get these bodies to redefine the syntax and semantics of
these languages. They started wooing the top C++ coders and paying
them. For example, there is a column that is written by a noted C++
expert who has participated in the standards process, Stan Lippman,
called "Pure C++".
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/05/02/PureC/default.aspx) The
first thing you notice about the code written in this column is that it
is anything but pure C++. Instead, there is .NET fecal matter
everywhere. It's almost like a verteran whore in the red-light district
of Rotterdam calling herself "The Pristine Virgin". Subtlety was not
Microsoft's primary objective with this ploy.

Anyhow, the idea is that, if you can't trick the programmers into
eating your COM crap, you can at least trick the managers, who will
hopefully force the programmers to eat your COM crap. This is why they
carefully chose the term "managed" to mean interpreted code - any idiot
who manages knows that something that is managed is better than
something that is not. Managers conclude..."Let's start using C#. We
can't have all this C++ code running amuck!!" What's remarkable is that
many, many managers are falling for this dung. How far Microsoft gets
is directly proportional to the gullibility of masses.

Luckiliy, there is marked polarization in the circles of experts about
what Microsoft is trying to do to C++, and frankly I think, given how
many international organizations rely upon C++ in its "pure" form, and
mandate its use in critical systems, Microsoft has opened up itself for
a government-sponsored lawsuit for false advertising. The results of
subverting a programming language like C++ would have enormous
financial consequences to the entire software engineering industry.

Nevertheless, objectively speaking, in suppor of the *engineers* at
Microsoft, the IDE and C++ compiler proper of VS2005 is unequivocably
first-class. If feel sorry for those true programmers at Microsoft who
have been forced to silently compromise their principles to produce
..NET caca for the rest of us.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

.