From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,995c28f68b9dc343 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,995c28f68b9dc343 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,995c28f68b9dc343 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,995c28f68b9dc343 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,995c28f68b9dc343 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 107d55,995c28f68b9dc343 X-Google-Attributes: gid107d55,public From: Jay Martin Subject: Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Date: 1997/08/30 Message-ID: <34086280.78317A8B@earthlink.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 269099331 References: <5u5m5b$7q6$1@news2.digex.net> Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.java.tech,comp.lang.c++ Date: 1997-08-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Patrick Doyle wrote: > > In article , Robert Dewar wrote: > >Ell said > > > >< >The overwhelming evidence of which some refuse to accept.>> > > > >No you can't win with an inferior product, winning or success with products > >is how superiority is measured. > > I disagree. Superiority is subjective; success is due to marketing. > > If you don't think this is the case, then you have more faith in the > average consumer's IQ then I do. Fool! You are wrong by Robert Dewars definition! "A winning or successful product is "superior". Proof by contradiction: Suppose you have "inferior" product that is "successful". But by the above axiom, the product must be "superior" and not "inferior" (contradition). QED. Jay