* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] <5tvvsj$lh2$1@news2.digex.net> @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-08-27 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Jeff Brown 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier 2 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: W. Wesley Groleau x4923 @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > The "better" does not always win out, witness VHS over Beta, other > cars over the Tucker, etc, etc. For comp.land.ada, "Edsel" might bo over better :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-27 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) W. Wesley Groleau x4923 @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: W. Wesley Groleau x4923 @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > > The "better" does not always win out, witness VHS over Beta, other > > cars over the Tucker, etc, etc. > > For comp.land.ada, "Edsel" might bo over better :-) Someone stole the 'g' from my keyboard. :-) -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wes Groleau, Hughes Defense Communications, Fort Wayne, IN USA Senior Software Engineer - AFATDS Tool-smith Wanna-be wwgrol AT pseserv3.fw.hac.com Don't send advertisements to this domain unless asked! All disk space on fw.hac.com hosts belongs to either Hughes Defense Communications or the United States government. Using email to store YOUR advertising on them is trespassing! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] <5tvvsj$lh2$1@news2.digex.net> 1997-08-27 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) W. Wesley Groleau x4923 @ 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Jeff Brown 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier 2 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Jeff Brown @ 1997-08-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <5tvvsj$lh2$1@news2.digex.net>, ell@access2.digex.net (Ell) writes: > Brett J. Stonier (bretts@brightwood.com) wrote: > The "better" does not always win out, witness VHS over Beta, other cars > over the Tucker, etc, etc. if someone mentions VHS over Beta one more time i think i will scream! get over it! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Jeff Brown @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Patrick Doyle @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <5u2arn$gpt@sun585.failife.com.au>, Jeff Brown <jeffb@unconfigured.xvnews.domain> wrote: >In article <5tvvsj$lh2$1@news2.digex.net>, ell@access2.digex.net (Ell) writes: >> Brett J. Stonier (bretts@brightwood.com) wrote: > >> The "better" does not always win out, witness VHS over Beta, other cars >> over the Tucker, etc, etc. > >if someone mentions VHS over Beta one more time i think i will scream! >get over it! The trouble is not that people mention it. The trouble is that they are made to mention it by people who claim that better technology will win out in the end. Get mad at them. -PD -- -- Patrick Doyle doylep@ecf.utoronto.ca ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) << The trouble is not that people mention it. The trouble is that they are made to mention it by people who claim that better technology will win out in the end. Get mad at them.>> But it is a bad example. The critical factor in the VHS victory was that it came out with longer playing tapes earlier, at a time when tapes were still quite expensive. True, the image quality was not as good, but that was not what mattered most to consumers. Thus this even it really much better cited as a simile for cases where technical folk misunderstand customers needs, and concetrate on aspects of what they see as quality which in fact are unimportant. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] <5tvvsj$lh2$1@news2.digex.net> 1997-08-27 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Jeff Brown @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 2 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Brett J. Stonier @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Ell wrote: > The "better" does not always win out, witness VHS over Beta, other > cars > over the Tucker, etc, etc. > > By hanging in there, doing there thing and opening people's eyes, > perhaps > the runner ups can "take the hill". [Btw, for me Burger King does > make a > better burger. That is until I give up meat.] I generally find it > useful > when I'm given another perspective versus the hegemonic, or dominant > ones > (which doesn't mean I necessarily agree however). > > Elliott > -- > "The domain object model is the foundation of OOD." > "We should seek out proven optimal practices and use them." > See SW Modeller vs SW Pragmatist Central: > http://www.access.digex.net/~ell Since everyone is trying to give me a technological history lesson, let's examine that for a second. Has Burger King's or Pepsi's efforts to defame their #1 competitors been successful? Last I checked, they are both still very much #2. So, what we learn from this is that when the #2 tries to dethrone the #1 by directly attacking it, it doesn't seem to work well. Now, how about an example of superior technology that won out? Take the Japanese car manufacturers of the 80s. Did they attack the U.S. car industry? I'm not an expert on this, but I don't think they did. They made superior cars and sold them at a reasonable cost. And they made a huge dent in the U.S. car industry, knocking them off their throne of dominance. So, it seems to be possible to take the high road and still win out. This high road is not what I've been witnessing in these threads and from Meyer. I am interested in Java and play with it, but I am certainly not so delusional as to think it has yet fully arrived, is suitable for air traffic control systems, or will ever solve the world's problems. Yet when Eiffel proponents denounce it as a toy or a sham, they insinuate that those who use it are not intelligent enough to make the proper choice. And this will cause resentment towards Eiffel among Java users (quite a few people, these days!), which is (I believe) the exact opposite of what they are trying to achive. Brett S. http://www.mtjeff.com/~calvin/devhbook ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier @ 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-08-29 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <34059D8A.3F3B7FA4@brightwood.com> "Brett J. Stonier" <bretts@brightwood.com> writes: > Now, how about an example of superior technology that won out? Take the > Japanese car manufacturers of the 80s. Did they attack the U.S. car > industry? I'm not an expert on this, but I don't think they did. They > made superior cars and sold them at a reasonable cost. And they made a > huge dent in the U.S. car industry, knocking them off their throne of > dominance. So, it seems to be possible to take the high road and still > win out. This is the _only_ way to win out in the end. It may well be that this won't be sufficient, but anything else is a sure-fire elixer for absolute failure for the reasons you cite. In this particular case you site, I happen to know that indeed there were no such attacks. The main reason why this might not be enough is two fold: 1) there needs to be "enough of a win" 2) the _customer_ needs to twig that there is such a win. By 2) I don't mean the _manufacturer_ (coder, whatever), but the "end user". [some, imo, highly accurate stuff about BM and the E-Jihad, snipped] /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` James P. White 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: James P. White @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Silvio Calissi wrote: > > Paul Johnson wrote in article <5u61fk$e23$5@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com> > >Sun come along with Java, and suddenly it makes more progress in 1 year > than > >Eiffel has in its entire existence, despite being clearly inferior to > >Eiffel on every ground that Eiffel has ever been criticized on. > > Why did companies like SUN, MS, Borland, ... support JAVA instead of another > (better) language. Do you think that they are stupid ? How can they be > ignorant that this leads to the second historic mistake ? > I really like to know some opinions on this. *sigh* Just to remind everyone again, a fundamental reason for Java's huge current and future success is that Java is targeted to a platform independent byte code delivered across networks in a secure manner (the JVM - Java Virtual Machine). A huge amount of debate rages around Java defeciency in not being the perfect language. It isn't, nor is it even possible to create such a beast (remember the Tower of Babel?). And while Java as a language has some merits, it is a world beater and destined for greatness because the JVM is the platform which enables the age of the network (the one we are in the beginning of now) as x86/DOS was for the IBM PC (which was the platform which enabled the age of the personal computer which now history, and Intel and Microsoft won the war). An interesting footnote in this is the UCSD Pascal p-System which was a platform independent system. It was quite popular and enjoyed fair success (without any marketing) and there was even a computer which had a p-code CPU. It's success came from being able to interoperate (at a performance penalty) across all the popular platforms of the day (Apple II, Z-80 CP/M [the x86/DOS of the day], DEC LSI-11, and quite a few others). It was wiped out by the IBM PC which made all those platforms commercially uninteresting (and also spawned Turbo Pascal). It remains possible that such a scenario could play out again. The real battlefield for this whole conflict is who will own the standard for the winning platform in the 1billion unit installed base which is the product of the network age (it will be dominated by set top boxes, smart TVs, and NCs; personal computers as we know them will be less than 20% of the entire market). Microsoft has made all the right moves to undercut the all-but-certain path that the JVM had for that and is making great strides in shifting the direction back to Windows (CE that is). The WebTV is quite significant in this strategy and the outcome of their $425million acquisition (it was supposed to be final but apparently Justice is realizing maybe they made a mistake, which they did in allowing it). But even with Windows CE being the OS winner, the JVM remains the solution for application software because WinCE is CPU independent and runs on the many different processors used in consumer electronics. So Microsoft plans to replace x86/DOS/Win with JVM/WinCE, and it is quite likely the way it will turn out (naturally I would prefer a simple JVM world, but then no one asked me...). jim ----------------------------------------------------------------------- James P. White Netscape DevEdge Champion for IFC Director of Technology Adventure Online Gaming http://www.gameworld.com Developers of Gameworld -- Live Action Role-Playing and Strategic Games jim@pagesmiths.com Pagesmiths' home is http://www.pagesmiths.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-29 0:00 ` The language is beside the point (was: The great Java showcase) John G. Volan ` (3 more replies) 1 sibling, 4 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Paul Johnson @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <34059D8A.3F3B7FA4@brightwood.com>, bretts@brightwood.com says... > >Ell wrote: >Since everyone is trying to give me a technological history lesson, >let's examine that for a second. Has Burger King's or Pepsi's efforts >to defame their #1 competitors been successful? Last I checked, they >are both still very much #2. So, what we learn from this is that when >the #2 tries to dethrone the #1 by directly attacking it, it doesn't >seem to work well. Avis did rather well with "we try harder". I don't think you can read too much into this. >Now, how about an example of superior technology that won out? Take the >Japanese car manufacturers of the 80s. They were not competing in a standards war. Imagine that the Japanese cars, for some strange reason, had to be right-hand-drive models whereas the US standard is left-hand-drive (I do hope I've got that the right way round). How many cars would they have sold then? >I am interested in Java and play with it, but I am >certainly not so delusional as to think it has yet fully arrived, is >suitable for air traffic control systems, or will ever solve the world's >problems. Some people are not as enlightned as you. Also, I think you might forgive us some frustration. Eiffel has been around now for over 10 years, but is still very much a minority language. Sun come along with Java, and suddenly it makes more progress in 1 year than Eiffel has in its entire existence, despite being clearly inferior to Eiffel on every ground that Eiffel has ever been criticised on. Aaarrrggghhhh. >Yet when Eiffel proponents denounce it as a toy or a sham, >they insinuate that those who use it are not intelligent enough to make >the proper choice. So what do we do? Shut up and be smug about how we know so much better? Java, I notice, is being hyped as an improvement on C++ (which it is). Why can't we hype Eiffel as an improvement on both? Paul. -- Paul Johnson | GEC-Marconi Ltd is not responsible for my opinions. | +44 1245 242244 +-----------+-----------------------------------------+ Work: <paul.johnson@gecm.com> | You are lost in a twisty maze of little Home: <Paul@treetop.demon.co.uk> | standards, all different. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* The language is beside the point (was: The great Java showcase) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` John G. Volan 1997-09-02 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-08-29 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Dennis Weldy ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: John G. Volan @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Paul Johnson wrote: > > Also, I think you might forgive us some frustration. Eiffel has been > around now for over 10 years, but is still very much a minority language. > Sun come along with Java, and suddenly it makes more progress in 1 year than > Eiffel has in its entire existence, despite being clearly inferior to > Eiffel on every ground that Eiffel has ever been criticised on. > Aaarrrggghhhh. Here's my theory on why Java is exploding right now: It isn't the language or any of its compilable features that's driving the juggernaut. Trying to compare the Java _language_ eature for feature with any other language (be it Eiffel or Ada or C++ or whatever) is a futile exercise and is entirely beside the point. The real keys to Java's success are: (1) its model of execution, embodied in the Java Virtual Machine, offering the tantalizing prospect of "write once, run anywhere," its security model, etc., etc. (2) the large set of standardized _libraries_ that come with Java allowing you to easily do all sorts of nifty things on the Internet. Or at least that's the hype. You can of course debate how well Java succeeds in these two areas, whether Java byte codes really are portable across competing JVM's, whether Microsoft or Sun will win the class library wars, etc. My point is that if you're fighting a language war based on language features, you're missing the point. In short: "It's the Internet, stupid." -- Internet.Usenet.Put_Signature (Name => "John G. Volan", Employer => "Raytheon/TI Advanced C3I Systems, San Jose, CA", Work_Email => "jvolan@ti.com", Home_Email => "johnvolan@sprintmail.com", Slogan => "Ada95: World's *FIRST* International-Standard OOPL", Disclaimer => "My employer never defined these opinions, so using " & "them would be totally erroneous...or is that just " & "nondeterministic behavior now? :-) "); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The language is beside the point (was: The great Java showcase) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` The language is beside the point (was: The great Java showcase) John G. Volan @ 1997-09-02 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Robert Munck 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: W. Wesley Groleau x4923 @ 1997-09-02 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) John G. Volan wrote: > Here's my theory on why Java is exploding .... The real keys to > Java's success are: > > [two factors that IMHO should be valued] But (again IMHO) probably of greater influence overall (3) It looks like C. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wes Groleau, Hughes Defense Communications, Fort Wayne, IN USA Senior Software Engineer - AFATDS Tool-smith Wanna-be wwgrol AT pseserv3.fw.hac.com Don't send advertisements to this domain unless asked! All disk space on fw.hac.com hosts belongs to either Hughes Defense Communications or the United States government. Using email to store YOUR advertising on them is trespassing! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The language is beside the point (was: The great Java showcase) 1997-09-02 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 @ 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Robert Munck 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Robert Munck @ 1997-09-03 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On Tue, 2 Sep 1997 19:35:18 GMT, "W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <wwgrol@pseserv3.fw.hac.com> wrote: >John G. Volan wrote: >> Here's my theory on why Java is exploding .... The real keys to >> Java's success are: >... > (3) It looks like C. Also smells like C. Bob Munck Mill Creek Systems LC ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-29 0:00 ` The language is beside the point (was: The great Java showcase) John G. Volan @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier [not found] ` <5u6ovi$5kb$1@news2.digex.net> 3 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Dennis Weldy @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) I would suggest this approach: come up with a way to tie Eiffel to the Web. Were it not for the web, would Java have such a large following? Another query: is there an Eiffel compiler (EDK) which I can download? Dennis Paul Johnson wrote in article <5u61fk$e23$5@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com>... >In article <34059D8A.3F3B7FA4@brightwood.com>, bretts@brightwood.com says... >> >>Ell wrote: > >>Since everyone is trying to give me a technological history lesson, >>let's examine that for a second. Has Burger King's or Pepsi's efforts >>to defame their #1 competitors been successful? Last I checked, they >>are both still very much #2. So, what we learn from this is that when >>the #2 tries to dethrone the #1 by directly attacking it, it doesn't >>seem to work well. > >Avis did rather well with "we try harder". I don't think you can read >too much into this. > >>Now, how about an example of superior technology that won out? Take the >>Japanese car manufacturers of the 80s. > >They were not competing in a standards war. > >Imagine that the Japanese cars, for some strange reason, had to be >right-hand-drive models whereas the US standard is left-hand-drive (I >do hope I've got that the right way round). How many cars would they >have sold then? > >>I am interested in Java and play with it, but I am >>certainly not so delusional as to think it has yet fully arrived, is >>suitable for air traffic control systems, or will ever solve the world's >>problems. > >Some people are not as enlightned as you. > >Also, I think you might forgive us some frustration. Eiffel has been >around now for over 10 years, but is still very much a minority language. >Sun come along with Java, and suddenly it makes more progress in 1 year than >Eiffel has in its entire existence, despite being clearly inferior to >Eiffel on every ground that Eiffel has ever been criticised on. >Aaarrrggghhhh. > >>Yet when Eiffel proponents denounce it as a toy or a sham, >>they insinuate that those who use it are not intelligent enough to make >>the proper choice. > >So what do we do? Shut up and be smug about how we know so much better? > >Java, I notice, is being hyped as an improvement on C++ (which it is). >Why can't we hype Eiffel as an improvement on both? > >Paul. > >-- >Paul Johnson | GEC-Marconi Ltd is not responsible for my opinions. | >+44 1245 242244 +-----------+-------------------------------------- ---+ >Work: <paul.johnson@gecm.com> | You are lost in a twisty maze of little >Home: <Paul@treetop.demon.co.uk> | standards, all different. > >. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-29 0:00 ` The language is beside the point (was: The great Java showcase) John G. Volan 1997-08-29 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Dennis Weldy @ 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier [not found] ` <5u6ovi$5kb$1@news2.digex.net> 3 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Brett J. Stonier @ 1997-08-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Johnson Paul Johnson wrote: > Avis did rather well with "we try harder". I don't think you can read > > too much into this. Ah, but did they say "We try harder than those lazy Hertz guys."? "We try harder" is a positive statement that doesn't create defensiveness and hostility. > They were not competing in a standards war. > > Imagine that the Japanese cars, for some strange reason, had to be > right-hand-drive models whereas the US standard is left-hand-drive (I > do hope I've got that the right way round). How many cars would they > have sold then? Exactly what do you mean by a standards war? A fight to become the standard programming language of choice? I don't see that as a standards war, like CORBA vs. COM, where one winning out precludes the use of another. Java getting really popular shouldn't keep people who want to from using Eiffel. Did you mean something else? > So what do we do? Shut up and be smug about how we know so much > better? > > Java, I notice, is being hyped as an improvement on C++ (which it is). > > Why can't we hype Eiffel as an improvement on both? No, if Eiffel is as good as you guys say, you *need* to hype it. You just need to do it more diplomatically. I'd suggest something along the lines of "Java is great for certain purposes, but Eiffel is better in these situations for these reasons." What I see come from Meyer and others is more like "Java is a piece of crap, and Eiffel is the key to the universe." Cocky, sour grapes like that are not going to win *me* over. Most of the respondents to my original reply have given Java some credit, saying things like "Well, Java's not evil; its a pretty good language. Its just that Eiffel is much better." Run with *that* attitude! Brett S. http://www.mtjeff.com/~calvin/devhbook ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <5u6ovi$5kb$1@news2.digex.net>]
* Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) [not found] ` <5u6ovi$5kb$1@news2.digex.net> @ 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Paul Johnson @ 1997-09-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <5u6ovi$5kb$1@news2.digex.net>, ell@access4.digex.net says... > >Paul Johnson (paul.johnson@gecm.com) wrote: >: In article <34059D8A.3F3B7FA4@brightwood.com>, bretts@brightwood.com says... >: > >: >Ell wrote: > >I did NOT write ANYTHING in this post. <-- Except this. Sorry about that. The phrase "Ell wrote:" was written by "bretts", who's post I was quoting. I deleted Ell's text, but failed to delete the attribution at the top. Paul. -- Paul Johnson | GEC-Marconi Ltd is not responsible for my opinions. | +44 1245 242244 +-----------+-----------------------------------------+ Work: <paul.johnson@gecm.com> | You are lost in a twisty maze of little Home: <Paul@treetop.demon.co.uk> | standards, all different. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1997-09-03 0:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <5tvvsj$lh2$1@news2.digex.net> 1997-08-27 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-08-27 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-08-27 0:00 ` Jeff Brown 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Patrick Doyle 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier 1997-08-28 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1997-08-29 0:00 ` James P. White 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Paul Johnson 1997-08-29 0:00 ` The language is beside the point (was: The great Java showcase) John G. Volan 1997-09-02 0:00 ` W. Wesley Groleau x4923 1997-09-03 0:00 ` Robert Munck 1997-08-29 0:00 ` The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Dennis Weldy 1997-08-29 0:00 ` Brett J. Stonier [not found] ` <5u6ovi$5kb$1@news2.digex.net> 1997-09-01 0:00 ` Paul Johnson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox