|
Am I the only one who's reminded of...
Am I the only one who is reminded of Chris Farley when watching those Balmer videos? He would have perfect to play him in a movie.
That kind of stuff makes me loose respect for a person really quick.
--Josh
JWA
Monday, October 20, 2003
What's wrong with a CEO who shows a little passion for his work?
Prakash S
Monday, October 20, 2003
what's wrong with saying that a ceo that shows a little passion for his work reminds you of Chris Farley?
how 'bout that?
Monday, October 20, 2003
Apparently, it causes the original poster to lose respect for the CEO. That's "what's wrong with it."
Personally, I'm of two minds about it. Steve did seem a bit too overexcited, but it is nice to see a man who's excited about something. Say what you will about Ballmer, but he's got passion, and I appreciate that.
The Pedant, Brent P. Newhall
Monday, October 20, 2003
There's been just too much real tech babble in this forum lately, and too little M$ bashing. That's what he felt was wrong - with this forum!
Johnny Bravo
Monday, October 20, 2003
Hey, MS bashing is the exception in this forum, not the rule.
This ain't no stinking slashdot! :-)
Leonardo Herrera
Monday, October 20, 2003
Agreed with Leonardo. I've seen lots of messages from enthusiastic .NET developers here (see the "I finally got it about .NET" thread).
The Pedant, Brent P. Newhall
Monday, October 20, 2003
At least Ballmer works for Microsoft more than 20 years and there is not sign that he is ready to abandon it...
Mike
Monday, October 20, 2003
Except Chris Farley can sing, and sing drunk.
Simon Lucy
Monday, October 20, 2003
I was actually very impressed by steve ballmers "developers, developers, developers..."
I do xplat development but the bigger % is for mac, after seeing that I remember wishing that I had seen steve jobs show similar enthusiasm about supporting 3rd party developers....
FullNameRequired
Monday, October 20, 2003
Losing respect for somebody is "wrong"???
Don't make me whip out Godwin's law.
Respect _this_ biatch!
Monday, October 20, 2003
Could someone please explain something?
On one hand we have Ballmer dancing around and screaming about his enthusiasm for supporting independant developers, and on the other hand someone at Microsoft believes operating system APIs should be protected and only available to Microsoft developers - at least until they were forced to open up more APIs to independant developers.
I just don't get it. How do you enthusiastically support developers by restricting their access to operating system APIs that are useful and stable for use by application developers?
Yes, I'm sure Microsoft is perfectly entitled to keep its APIs secret - I'm not arguing with that, so assume for the time being that I'll agree with anyone who says MS shouldn't have been forced to make those resources available to developers. I just want to know how that particular habit helps indicate Microsoft's offiical enthusiasm for independant developers.
(Given Ballmer's position, I'ld tend to assume he approves of a fair portion of Microsoft's operating procedures - he's not an idiot, and I doubt that many people are pushing things past him when he objects.)
andrew m
Monday, October 20, 2003
Of course, Sarge was responsible for Ballmer's "Developers" speech, but they fell out over critical creative differences.
(I wonder if anyone else here is going to get this reference.)
Joel Goodwin
Monday, October 20, 2003
Steve Ballmer is pretty "passionate" about his work, and its quite refreshing compared to Teflon "suits" who just sit there and look high and mighty.
You can disagree with his stance about this or that, but I think that the business world needs more people with his enthusiasm and belief in his work.
Robert Moir
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
Andrew,
reading Raymond Chen's blog ( http://blogs.gotdotnet.com/raymondc/ ) can be a real eye opener as to why certain things are the way they are in Windows (including how some lessons were learned about keeping things out of the hands of 3rd party programmers that believe there app is the best thing since sliced bread, and that the user should be given th opportunity to meet the app in every little nook and cranny that it can possibly be stowed in, or how some will always take the lazy option, even when warned that the particulars of this implementation will change in future versions etc etc)
Just me (Sir to you)
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
http://blogs.gotdotnet.com/raymondc/PermaLink.aspx/82a64761-2c6c-4f2e-b567-4fd9b160e7ac is a good example.
Just me (Sir to you)
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
"or how some will always take the lazy option, even when warned that the particulars of this implementation will change in future versions etc etc"
So an API that's stable enough to be used by the Word developers isn't stable enough to be used by a 3rd party word processor?
Well, if you say so...
Personally I'm not sure that it's so wonderful that the Word developers get to rely on OS upgrades also upgrading their application, but if that's enthusiastically supporting third party developers I guess it's fine. (Alternatively, why is it acceptable for Word to break when the OS is upgraded, if it's not acceptable for 3rd party apps to break when the OS is upgraded?)
There's lots of good reasons why OS internals shouldn't be made available to application developers, and if I had asked about that then I'ld have been interested in finding out more about that, but unfortunately my question was slightly different. I actually asked why APIs that are stable and useful for _application developers_ to use are only made available to Microsoft developers, and how this indicates enthusiasim for supporting 3rd party developers.
(It's that last bit that I'm really interested in, and I'm still not sure you've explained why things that it's acceptable for Word to use and do are somehow unacceptable for 3rd party applications to use and do.)
"including how some lessons were learned about keeping things out of the hands of 3rd party programmers that believe there app is the best thing since sliced bread, and that the user should be given th opportunity to meet the app in every little nook and cranny that it can possibly be stowed in"
Enthusiastically preventing competent developers from using resources that might be misused isn't exactly what I thought people were talking about.
andrew m
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
 Recent Topics
Fog Creek Home
| 
