Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

The Tech Interviews of Yesteryear 134

Posted by timothy from the still-20020101-in-the-states dept.
nihilist_1137 writes: "Cnet has a collection of interviews with some of the 'biggest movers and shakers' of 2001. It focuses on their plans, ambitions and fears. Included is Sir Arthur C. Clark, Bill Gates, Will Wright, and Bill Joy, to name a few." It''s a fairly eclectic bunch of interviews collected from the last year, not ones done specifically for 2001 nostalgia.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Tech Interviews of Yesteryear More

The Tech Interviews of Yesteryear

Comments Filter:

  • bundle it up (Score:4, Insightful)

    by magicslax ( 532351 ) <frank_salim.yahoo@com> on Tuesday January 01, 2002 @10:02PM (#2772212)
    This cracks me up, in a funny-as-in-sad sort of way.

    In the Gates interview, he said "If we can't add any features, then what is Windows? I mean, there were guys who sold TCP/IP stacks for $100. Should we not have put TCP/IP stacks into Windows?"

    If MS was reimplementing TCP/IP for windows today, it would probably compatible only with Windows Media Packets.

    Oh well ^_^
    • "If MS was reimplementing TCP/IP for windows today, it would probably compatible only with Windows Media Packets. "

      In the 80s, Microsoft developed* a network protocol called NetBEUI (it's short for NetBIOS Extended User Interface). NetBEUI could only handle NetBIOS and Microsoft fought tooth and nail against the competing "open" protocol. In any case, Microsoft eventually capitulated and started supporting TCP/IP in its products.

      Overall, it seems you're overestimating Microsoft. Whatever its short-term reflex may be, Microsoft still needs the piggy-backing power of open standards. In the long-run, this guargantuan giant wants to maintain its obesity and it will never stand to lose marketshare.

      Stephan

      *Note. Actually, I am not sure Microsoft developed that technology since NetBIOS was at least being licensed through IBM.

  • Damn....These last three days should be called " The Attack of the Slashdot News Montage " Meta news is great, but meta news that is already meta news? Anyways, the Interview with Arthur C. Clarke is great and I especially love this quote from Clarke: "No, obviously you have to continue to use the technology. Life would come to a stop if we didn't have our cell phones and our computers and so forth." - Heh, at least I'm not the only one who believes this!

  • About the GPL, he said "But if you say to people, "Do you understand the GPL?" And they'll say, "Huh?" And they're pretty stunned when the Pac-Man-like nature of it is described to them."

    Pac-Man-like nature? IANAL but I think I understand the basics of the GPL but wtf is the Pac-Man-like nature of it?

    Anyone care to comment?
    • Um, it eats balls?

      Not that I agree, I'm just positing the Gates perspective.

    • "Pac-Man-like nature? IANAL but I think I understand the basics of the GPL but wtf is the Pac-Man-like nature of it?"

      Agreed : I understood the "viral nature of the GPL" analogy, but I have no clue what Pac-Man has to do with this.
      Anyhow, I think Microsoft should be sued by Namco for mis-using the "Pac-Man" trademark.

    • but wtf is the Pac-Man-like nature of it?

      You sir, have been the recipient of some genuine grade-a Microsoft brand FUD. How is Linux like cancer? Or the GPL like Pac-Man? If you explain something to someone in terms that are so base that it seems their meaning should be obvious, people will tend to say "Okay, that makes sense...yada yada yada", instead of saying "Yo Bill, WTF! Care to explain yourself without poor metaphors and misleading analogies?" And on top of it all, Bill seems to have forgotten that Pac-Man actually kicks ass.

      • Re:Can someone in the know explain Billy G's comme (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        if project alpha uses some code from the GPL license, then all of project alpha code is subject to ("under") the GPL.

        the GPL-as-a-virus and GPL-as-Pac-Man-esque are the same thing, just different ways of expressing the concept.

        if the pellet or ghost that Pac Man eats is a GPL pellet, then Pac Man is GPL. I think there is a kind of a food-chain implication here, like there should be a line of ever larger pac men feeding on eachother and in the end the big pac-man is under the GPL, or "infected" by/with it.
    • About the GPL, he said "But if you say to people, "Do you understand the GPL?" And they'll say, "Huh?" And they're pretty stunned when the Pac-Man-like nature of it is described to them."

      It tells you a lot about the people Bill Gates surrounds himself with. I can't imagine what kind of innovation you're going to accomplish when everybody around you is willing to praise the brilliance of your every utterance. That's great for a lazy trust-fund kid, but for a guy who's still running one of the largest American companies, it's not a recipe for long-term success. Better hang on tight to that monopoly, Billy.

      Alternatively, the people he's talking about could be major American business leaders... In other words, the same people who would gladly distribute software under a license requiring the sacrifice of the user's firstborn... who are hideously offended that the GPL might require some small sacrifices fom the user in exchange for free redistribution rights.

    • Re:Can someone in the know explain Billy G's comme (Score:5, Funny)

      by Digitalia ( 127982 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2002 @11:19PM (#2772401) Homepage
      Ya must be a youngin, so we'll all forgive ya. Pac-Man, an arcade classic produced by Namco, involved a small yellow spheroid. The goal of the game was to gobble up dots and fruits for the benefit of Pac-Man. The analogy fits the Open-Source movement rather well, in my opinion. Open programmers make use of those resources that have been left for them to access. Meanwhile, companies that actually care about such petty things as profit and market shares, represented by the ghosts in Gates' Pac-Man analogy, attempt to waylay the Open programmers. These programmers can only combat the corporation by consuming fruit, obviously representing killer ideas that are worth implementation. The whole epic takes place in a maze that is oddly similar to a cubicle forest, further reinforcing the analogy.

  • Gates' interview is rather chilling (Score:4, Insightful)

    by J.D. Hogg ( 545364 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2002 @10:18PM (#2772263) Homepage
    "How can you be sure that people will want and pay for Web services? The HailStorm model is based on consumers paying for these services.
    Well, some will be free, and some will be for pay. The marketplace will decide. When you describe to people that every file on their machine will be backed up--photos of their kids, business documents, e-mail--if your machine is taken or breaks, those will be available to you."

    and to Microsoft for marketing purposes, to Ashcroft for his latest terrorist witch-hunt, to the IRS for the audit they had in mind for you, ...

    Does Gate really think people will swallow that ? I mean, holy crap, hell will freeze over before I send any of my files to a remote storage volume owned by Microsoft (or owned by anybody else for that matter).

    • and to Microsoft for marketing purposes, to Ashcroft for his latest terrorist witch-hunt, to the IRS for the audit they had in mind for you

      I think that tinfoil you wrap around your head to shield you from the government mind control satellite needs to be loosened a bit.

      On top of it all, why would you think for a minute that Yahoo or AOL or your own mom and pop ISP won't sell your data?

      By the way, you don't own a credit card, do you?

      • Re:Client/server frightens you? Poor baby (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Wednesday January 02, 2002 @12:27AM (#2772510) Journal
        You miss the point. Like the scandal with IE, Microsoft will charge you for the service whether you want it or not with each Windows purchase. Microsoft just added that backup services plan to make its image look better when they plan to charge all corporate users. Thank about it from Bill's perspective. Investors have witnessed a %50 growth every year for close to 15 years and if Microsoft falls short of this then they lose money in the mind of the investor. The investors expect the same growth or else they will sell. The pc industry finally is in a slump and to top it off the whole market is saturated if not over saturated with Windows/Office and many customers do not need to upgrade. Microsoft has tried or are trying different markets like the server end and mobile end to keep expanding. But had no luck. NT makes up only a third of all server os installations and the number is not changing. SQL server is behind Oracle and perhaps even Sybase sales of databases. No growth here. Perhaps winCE devices might take over in the future but for now Microsoft is actually illegally giving them away below cost to hurt palm. No money in that either. At least not yet. The only way Microsoft can make more money and expand is by charging a monthly renters fee for the things we use our computers for. Examples are buying from the net, making copies of photo's taken from your digital camera, and perhaps even booting( which is what Microsoft would make a fortune off of). My guess is that the professional edition of the next version of Windows will only be available by renting via hailstorm. Free backup will be included to make it appear you are getting something for the fee and Microsoft wants to do it to keep the DOJ off their butts. But rest assured the free backup services will be required in the professional edition so Microsoft can milk its existing monopoly while ignorant home edition users will not know any of this. Microsoft has always beat the expectations in the most harsh critics when it comes to squashing competition and milking profits.

        • Okay I take the bait.

          > Like the scandal with IE, Microsoft will charge you for the service whether you want it or not with each Windows purchase.

          I was never charged for IE. It was a free download when they started it and they bundle it with newer versions without charging extra.

          > Microsoft has tried or are trying different markets like the server end and mobile end to keep expanding. But had no luck.

          Check your data. They're expanding on the server side, and on the mobile side. But you're right, luck has nothing to do with it.

          > Perhaps winCE devices might take over in the future but for now Microsoft is actually illegally giving them away below cost to hurt palm.

          What you been smoking?

          > Examples are buying from the net, making copies of photo's taken from your digital camera, and perhaps even booting( which is what Microsoft would make a fortune off of).

          If they provide the service of handling the payments, why not charge for it? Every online retailer does that now. If they make prints of your pictures, that's also a service. And that last thing ... well you're such a zealot. I wouldn't even have responded if they didn't mod you up like that.

          > My guess is that the professional edition of the next version of Windows will only be available by renting via hailstorm.

          But I guess that your guessing is what makes you so paranoid. You should open up your eyes and get the facts, and not from www.linuxzealotsRus.org.

          I'm not a microsofty. Not anymore. I realize now that I may never have really been one. I just realize that I get reasonably pissed off by the thought that maybe one day zealots like you will rule the world. That's when I'll invent my own biosphere and spend the rest of my life counting fly-by probes on Mars.
    • Does Gate really think people will swallow that ? I mean, holy crap, hell will freeze over before I send any of my files to a remote storage volume owned by Microsoft (or owned by anybody else for that matter).


      So what? The fact of life is that there is a market for this service and many people would use it. I have tons of stuff myself (e.g. selfmade pics and music) that aren't sensitive but for which I could use a convenient backup solution (I don't consider tapes etc. convenient or safe). Providing this service doesn't make Microsoft evil, thinking that anyone can force you to use it is just silly (opposed to chilly as you put it). But of course, excessive paranoia gets always modded up on slashdot ;-)

    • "There is this whole history that free software is developed often in the academic environment, where basically government money funded that work. And then commercial work is done. TCP/IP came out of the university environment. Now, 90 percent of the implementations you buy are commercially tuned and supported. And then the companies that do that commercial work pay taxes, create jobs, so the government keeps funding more research, primarily in universities. So that ecosystem where you have free software and commercial software, and customers always get to decide which they use, that's a very important and healthy ecosystem."

      First of all, in many college based 'free' software it is the programmer or group of programmer who 'pays' for the development, in the manner of paying for thier education and sacraficing time they could have spent at a job, studying or with friends. In rare cases there are Government grants for that lobbyists have pushed through congress, because politicians are cheaper than developing the software yourself.

      This is why GPL is a 'Threat.' It is a threat to government funding to get the best and brightest upcoming programmers to implement the newest developments in software. Under a "free" license the software company with the money to push these bills through congress will also be able to snap up patents and copyrights which the can then 'license' to third party developers.

      Free software development is not a 'healthy' ecosystem. Many time the people who put the most effort into 'free' software have turned around to find themselves being sued out of exsitance for violating patents or copyrights on code they wrote. Worse still is the independant software developer, should they wish to write a routine they first have to check who has patents on that. Even if they wish to write from scratch they may have to pay as much as $25 per piece of software they 'ship' depending on what it is they're trying to do. This obviously benenfits the major players, those who have the money to get patents or copyrights on 'obvious' code. This is why as soon as a freeware or shareware app becomes good it's author finds themselves in deep legal waters. Once a program is 'good enough' it is a threat to anyone with a similar, more costly program. If that company has a legal staff they can sue, or better yet Cease-and-desist letter out of existance anyone who poses a threat.

      Myself I don't mind that a company like say apple is capable of using BSD code to write a stable Operating system, as long as apple is crediting the authors and isn't turning around suing BSD developers. While not a scientific statistic according to google.com about 2,180 pages have the phrase "Microsoft Sues" on them. I didn't have any luck finding how many companies microsoft sued last year but I seem to recall it was twice as many as sued Microsoft. Also is you take away piracy the hit result is still over 1500. Some other interesting addendums is that adding the word 'patent' outsite the quotes narrows it to some 200 hits, and adding 'copyright' only narrows it to 1500 pages. In the interest of fairness "apple sues" matches 1500 hits and "linux sues" matches 7. However apparently "Linus sues" can't be found anywhere on the internet (until google indexes this page anyways.)

      If I had to sum up the software development market in one catch phrase "Innovation through Litigation" is the one that comes to mind, although "If you can't code it, Sue for it." comes in a close second.

  • Word Source (Score:4, Funny)

    by The Paradox ( 470614 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2002 @10:30PM (#2772296) Homepage Journal
    I cannot believe this quote. What the FUCK was going through Gates's head?

    I don't know that anyone has ever asked for the source code for Word. If they did, we would give it to them.

    But you can *bet* that I'm going to try it. Lemme go find a MS email address and request it. They've gotten me seriously curious. (Yes, I'm really going to do this after I post this comment.)

    And can I sue Gates for lying if they refuse to give it to me?

    • Re:Word Source (Score:2, Insightful)

      by magicslax ( 532351 )
      I don't know that anyone has ever asked for the source code for Word. If they did, we would give it to them.

      But you can *bet* that I'm going to try it. Lemme go find a MS email address and request it. They've gotten me seriously curious. (Yes, I'm really going to do this after I post this comment.)

      silly rabbit.

      MS will charge you massive fees and have you sign equally daunting NDAs before you actually get to see the code. Even with source code acess, it's not as if you could turn around and give it to OpenOffice and the like without opening up yourself and anyone else who even _saw_ it to legal action.

      The source is not freedom without the rights to modify and distribute. Interesting quote nonetheless.

      • Re:Word Source (Score:5, Interesting)

        by The Paradox ( 470614 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2002 @10:48PM (#2772328) Homepage Journal
        MS will charge you massive fees

        They said "give", didn't they?

        and have you sign equally daunting NDAs before you actually get to see the code.

        So? It would still be fascinating. I'm not doing this just out of open-source altruism, you know: it's just always been a dream of mine to see the code for a part of Office.

        Plus... I want to see if I'll get a reply. :D

        For anyone interested, here's the email I just sent them:

        ---

        Salutations;

        I am a user of Microsoft products, Windows and Office among others. I follow various pieces of Microsoft press with interest and intrigue, and I recently read Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates' interview with C|Net.

        Referencing the section of Mr. Gates' comments referring to open source software:

        "I don't know that anyone has ever asked for the source code for Word. If they did, we would give it to them."

        Taking Mr. Gates' comment at face value, I hereby request a copy of the source code for Word. I would be fascinated to learn from such a program. It has long been an ambition of mine to see exactly what goes into the Office suite's programs.

        I am completely serious in this query, and would appreciate a reply in the same vein.

        Thank you,

        (My real name, which I decline to place on Slashdot thank-you-very-much. ;))

        ---

        They said on the page that they would have someone get back to me within twenty-four hours using the email address I provided. Anyone interested in the reply can email me and request it.

        • Re:Word Source (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Kithraya ( 34530 )
          They said on the page that they would have someone get back to me within twenty-four hours using the email address I provided. Anyone interested in the reply can email me and request it.

          I've just got to see that reply. I'm sure they'll refuse, but I can't decide if they'll offer to sell it for a trillion dollars, or if they'll just say you took the quote out of context. In any event, I'd love to see the return email.
        • Don't forget to a) mod this up to ensure this guy is kept honest ;), and b) keep checking for a progress report!

          Well... I don't remember the exact moment I submitted it, but it was fairly close to ten EST. Update tomorrow by then, promise. I'll post it in this discussion, or like I said, I don't mind email.

          I've just got to see that reply. I'm sure they'll refuse, but I can't decide if they'll offer to sell it for a trillion dollars, or if they'll just say you took the quote out of context. In any event, I'd love to see the return email.

          Assuming I get one by then, it will be posted in this discussion tomorrow. If it isn't, then I'll post something to that effect, call them at their corporate headquarters the next day and demand to know why, then post *those* results. Watch this space....

          And I agree with you one hundred percent - I can't decide between those two fates for the email either, assuming that they answer at all and don't just write me off as a rabid penguin-lovin' open-source freak. They'd be wrong, anyway: I'm a rabid *blowfish*-lovin' open-source freak (but I like penguins too!). :D

          Anyway, I'm kinda interested in this one myself, so updates will be coming! And unless they attach Word's source with the email (better make sure my server doesn't have an attachment size limit...) I think I'll be replying to it.

        • Time for the update, everyone. As predicted, there has been no email from MS. So tomorrow, I'll either email them again or call them.

          On an excellent idea from one of the posters to this thread, Bodero, I'm moving the updates to my journal. There will be another update tomorrow - in the journal - for those of you interested, and daily updates until I get a straight answer out of Redmond. An OpenBSD-loving network admin with too much time on their hands is a dangerous thing for the folks at MS.... :)

          One more note. sroddy, the email's not valid because it's got slashdot spam armoring applied. For those of you wishing to contact me off of slashdot, the address is "sysadmin at mordac dot info". Or just post in the journal; that works too.

          Now I've just got to hope that they don't send the flying monkeys out after me. :D

    • Don't forget to a) mod this up to ensure this guy is kept honest ;), and b) keep checking for a progress report!

      I really wanna know what happens with this one! :)
    • I cannot believe this quote. What the FUCK was going through Gates's head?

      My Guess is that it is the wind, and that his head makeas a lousy whistle because it is too soft.

      ;-)

    • go get 'em !

      I'll be sure to watch your thread to see how this turns out.

      As for your comment "can I sue Gates for lying if they refuse to give it to me?", IANAL, but MWIAL (my wife IS a lawyer) and you can sue anyone for anything - as she often reminds me when I ask her - it doesn't mean you'll win ;)

      Best of Luck !!!
    • You'll probably get the sourcecode for Micro-Soft Word v0.9 for DOS 3.0. Keep in mind, though, that even if you got a copy of the source code for Word 2000, the .DOC file format is completely incompatible with Word XP.
    • I don't know that anyone has ever asked for the source code for Word. If they did, we would give it to them.

      I think "it" is a beating from the Microsoft Secret Dork Patrol.

  • MS Logic (Score:5, Funny)

    by Zalgon 26 McGee ( 101431 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2002 @10:47PM (#2772327)
    From Mr Allchin:

    And we're obviously going to spend a lot in marketing because we think the product sells itself...

    AH! It's all so clear now!

    • Jim is a funny guy:

      I don't want to talk about HailStorm because I think there's tremendous confusion about what the world thinks it is.

      ... well thats going to clear things up, by not talking about it.

      This is a hands-down winner over Windows 95.

      Interesting to compare your product to a previous product 6 year hence!

      We released (XP) to manufacturing on Friday and are super-happy about it.

      Why thats fab-brill!

      But you're going down a complete slippery slope of what is it that we shouldn't do. I mean, Oh my gosh, we added a line of code. Ooh, boy, this line of code--you know, I don't know; maybe we used too many variable letters or something. It's very, very hard to know--which will eventually play out here--beyond people in this room how that'll play out.

      Say no more...

  • Dale Fuller: The new barbarians? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gartogg ( 317481 ) <DavidsFullNameNO@SPAMgoogle.email> on Tuesday January 01, 2002 @11:00PM (#2772357) Homepage Journal
    Dale Fuller: The new barbarians? [cnet.com] is an interesting article about borland's resurgence as a real company in the marketplace, from thier slump for the past several years. The article doesn't really come out and say it, but the reason borland is doing well now, and wasn't before, is the personnel. I find it amusing that they don't just come out and say it, but they refer, again and again to the "departures of key staffers" when they started their decline, and now, according to Fuller, "one of the major indicators is the number of cool programmers who want to work here--and we're now getting people back from Microsoft, from universities, from all over the world." I guess what Robert A. Heinlein said is true: "brainpower is the scarcest commodity and the only one of real value."
  • Because Microsoft has always been extremely focused on high volume, low price,

    Ok, is it just me, or does pricing an OS at like two to three hundred dollars not really sound like high volume, low price.

    Maybe it's his billions and billions of dollars that makes him think that such an overpriced OS is "high volume, low price."

    Gimp.
    • Ok, is it just me, or does pricing an OS at like two to three hundred dollars not really sound like high volume, low price.

      Maybe it's his billions and billions of dollars that makes him think that such an overpriced OS is "high volume, low price."

      Depends on what you're comparing it to. Compared to Linux or BSD? Of course it's not cheap. Compared to pretty much any other OS on the market (Apple OSs don't count; they made money on the hardware), and yes, it's cheap.

      Simon
    • Lots of MS software is high volume low price.

      Think back a few years to when buying a database engine involved months of price negotiation with a suited salesman and you ended up paying an absolute fortune. Or when you had to pay thousands of dollars for anything more sophisticated than the free C compiler than came with your proprietary Unix? Or when fonts were specialised products sold mostly to people like newspapers, again for thousands?

      So MS introduced SQL Server for a grand or so compared to tens of thousands for the competitors.

      And development tools for a few hundred compared to around ten times as much for the same thing on a Unix box.

      MS themselves didn't directly drive font prices down from thousands or hundreds to pennies, but the introduction of Windows 3.1 did.

      So now some of the competitors have been forced to drop their prices, or introduce low-end products, to compete with MS, and some aren't there any more, and the font market has changed beyond recognition. And the Unix development tool market was so ludicrously overpriced that there is now plenty of competition, some of it open source and/or free beer, on Unix as well.

      Next? Well, the next thing that I would like to become "high volume low price" is mapping data. Down to the level of where the pipes and wires go in the pavement outside my house.

  • Blockquoth the Chief Software Architect,

    Now, 90 percent of the implementations you buy are commercially tuned and supported.

    Wouldn't 100% of the things you buy be commercially supported? Or is it just me...?

  • Remember a while ago when Cringely wrote the article about Microsoft building their own version of TCP/IP? [pbs.org]

    I really thought that Cringely had misheard some information at that point. I couldn't see how or why Microsoft would want to do that.

    Then I read the interview with Bill Gates [cnet.com] that was part of C|Net's end-of-year wrap-up. Check out this quote:

    [C|Net] As described by Microsoft, HailStorm has to be hosted on servers globally for the system to work. How do you plan to do that and ensure security?
    [Gates] "We are doing a lot. All of those things are being done with other people. The very protocols of the Internet will evolve for security and quality of service and richer caching. And so we are out talking with the Ciscos and the Akamais and Intel--you name it--for that level of stuff." [italics mine]

    All I can say is: wow.

    How much do you want to bet that Microsoft will be calling this "Secure TCP/IP"?
  • http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1014-201-7005495-0.htm l

    All the talk about how MS is encouraging competition by giving the consumer a choice... but then when pressed, the guy tells the real story. Manufacturers are only allowed to sell PCs that give the user a choice, loading up Windows FIRST, then they have to choose otherwise...

    NO DUH! Of course they'd accept that, because by the time the consumer has the option to switch to another pre-loaded OS, Windows is already on there... which means MS has already made their extra $130 on the price of the computer.

    Furthermore, OEMs can only put their own icons on the desktop if they allow MS icons as well (IE: advertisements).

    I don't get what they're so scared of... if MS really feels it has a quality product, it has nothing to fear. People will choose Windows at the outset and then people might actually feel good about it, as opposed to how it works now... even if you don't WANT windows on your new PC, you have to pay for it. Nobody likes being forced. Nobody likes being pushed around.

    Then he goes on about how MS is going to offer choices of different OSs... oh right... yeah, I'll believe that when I see it.

    It's obvious this guy thinks that installing Windows on every new PC is somehow a "right" of MS simply because they created it.

    "Well, something we don't permit and the court said they understand was that the user interface can be replaced without the user deciding that's OK...We think the user should make that choice so we have a coherent Windows experience when it comes up."

    Windows has to be on there first, MS makes their money, and obviously, if the choice is given by MS, whose product will they encourage?

    The whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth... Top that off with the fact that at my school and at the stores (all comps over 1.5ghz machines with 256+mb of ram) windows XP ran so sluggish... Most people don't notice/care, but I spend enough time on my computer that it would waste a significant amount of time waiting for My Computer, My Documents or IE 15-30 seconds per invocation... it will really add up, and I'm not willing to slow down, especially like that on those fast computers.
  • He's bringing the joy of walking to work to lazy people.

Slashdot Top Deals

On the eighth day, God created FORTRAN.

Close