fP modernization

[Ron Kracht]

Anthony Terrible wrote:
>> Gee,  Mr. Terrible,
>>
>> I did not have to think long and hard before I wrote this.
>>
>> Please tell us more about your sad employer and your pathetic co-workers.
>> Tell us more about how much more intelligent and forward looking you are
>> compared with them, but please, first, take a refresher course in English
>> grammar.
>>
>> Tell us more about how you work for the anal retentive auto industry 
>> which,
>> according to you has just begun to notice change after more than 100 
>> years.
>> Tell us how it is stupid because it was created before you were born.
>>
>> Reading your ranting is comparable to reading the belligerent liberal 
>> letters to
>> the editor in the local morning newspaper.  I get my daily laughs 
>> reading them.
>>
>> Being the expert codger you are with 40 years of experience with 
>> stupid people
>> in the automobile business, please keep us stupid folks updated.
>>
>> Keep the big  "I"  on your forehead, it is great entertainment.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Your Boss
>>
> 
> You and John should get together because both of you are about the same. 
> You can't see the forest through the trees. Because you can't read let 
> me dumb it down for you so there is no mistake. I'm not blaming my tools 
> I have done many things with File Pro my co-workers never thought were 
> possible as I am sure you have. I never called any of my co-workers 
> anything. In fact I know there strengths and my weakness and when and 
> were to use them.
> 
> But to make the point I was trying to make to you CDAY people though out 
> the 40 some years I have in the Automotive industry have been saying all 
> along with each NEW invention, Alternator instead of generator, HEI 
> ignition systems instead of points and condenser, Fuel Injection instead 
> of carburetion, Direct injection instead of pre-chambers, Disc Breaks 
> instead of Drum Breaks, Hydraulic Breaks instead of cable operated ones, 
> WE DON'T NEED THAT! WHAT WE HAVE WORKS WELL. I NEVER HAD ANY PROBLEMS. I 
> COULD ALWAYS MAKE IT DO WHAT I WANTED.  But guess what, these things are 
> here and the industry and the world is a better safer place because of 
> them.
> YOU SIR are the naysayer! Do you understand the point now or are you 
> just to dimwitted to get it? Damn you probably said the internet would 
> never fly. You and John deserve each other. You'll say anything to prove 
> that staying in the past is the place to be. Why do you even have inside 
> pluming? The outhouse worked just fine.
> 

You seem to be so wrapped up in your own points that you are not 
listening to those made by others.

No one denies that other languages, DBMSs, or approaches have value. 
What they are saying is that they don't have enough value for them or 
their customers to justify switching.

As inappropriate in may ways as your auto industry analogy is what 
does hold true about it is that new features that add sufficient value 
to people survive and those that do not (big tail fins, and rotary 
engines for example) fall by the wayside. For some people features 
like whitewall tires, dvd players, and surround sound may be necessary 
  - for other people they are fluff that add cost without value.

Don't assume that people who disagree with you are stupid or ruled by 
fear - they may just find that their cost-benefit analysis yields 
different results than yours.