At 12:28 PM -0400 9/22/00, Tom Emerson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I took a look at the page you mentioned

>  > For a fun historical perspective, read a legacy paper from 1992:
>  > http://www.adager.com/TechnicalPapersHTML/YearOfThePies.html
>>
>>  As a bonus, you also get to add some serious questions to
>  > your arsenal that,to the best of my knowledge, have not been
>  > answered satisfactorily after all these years.


>-- actually, I believe there is
>another group "out there" that will claim they have "satisfactory" answers
>to your questions: linux users.

I agree.  There is a tremendous amount of talent and energy being invested
on Linux.  Even HP corporate managers, following the leadership of the
Linux folks, have also jumped onto the Linux bandwagon :-)


Please note that I also wrote in that message, as my parting shot:

        Always looking forward to the future (which somehow depends on
        how much work we do today, because good things tend to NOT fall
        out of the sky by themselves)



>... [I suppose I'm
>somewhat unique in the computer market -- I've maintained from day one that
>there is no such thing as "the best" computer -- each computer (and OS, for
>that matter) has it's purpose and place in life.  Some are better suited for
>certain tasks than others, and I'll happily utilize "the best for a
>particular application" when needed (*)]

You are not unique and I am very pleased to be part of your camp.  Quoting
from that same paper, as I stressed Posix for MPE and SQL for IMAGE as two
examples of standard interfaces, way back in 1992:

----------------------------
Standards versus suitability
----------------------------

There are two camps in the standards battlefield. Some people want to
standardize
components while other people, more realistically, want to
standardize interfaces.
Sometimes, "the best component" -- according to a given set of someone else's
criteria -- is not necessarily the most appropriate under a given set of
circumstances for you. In any case, you want to be able to communicate with any
component by means of a suitable collection of standard-interface messages.


>(*) of course, "best for the application" tends to work out as:
>
>  * OLTP: HP3000
>  * ad hoc database design: windows + access
>  * mission critical database design & utilization: HP3000
>  * programming: HP & linux [although gui dev environments on windows is
>    "catching up"]
>  * magazine/ad layout & "power" graphics: macintosh

The list for the Mac is much longer, but I won't get into that topic :-)


>  * video processing: an Amiga [but since those are hard to find, a
>    custom-tailored windows machine fully dedicated to the task will do in a
>    pinch]
>  * games: windows [with the notable exception of "real-time" empire...]
>    [hiya maxforce!]



>With that in mind, I've posted the "question" you ask at the end -- are you
>satisfied with your current hardware/software diet? -- to the members of my
>Linux user group.  I'll collect a few answers before I direct them to your
>page and watch the results :)

I look forward to that.  Please keep me posted.


--
  _______________
|               |
|               |
|            r  |  Alfredo                     [log in to unmask]
|          e    |                           http://www.adager.com
|        g      |  F. Alfredo Rego
|      a        |  Manager, R & D Labs
|    d          |  Adager Corporation
|  A            |  Sun Valley, Idaho 83353-3000            U.S.A.
|               |
|_______________|