[Pc_Support] .NET based on Java?

[Paul M Foster]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 05:21:41PM -0700, Bryan J. Smith wrote:

<snip>

> BTW, do you know how many times people like yourself have
> come up and had this same attitude towards what I say?  It's
> been going on since before NT 3.1 was released.  There are so
> many things that are common knowledge from using the products
> early on, seeing the lineage and development, etc...

Yes, I'm aware of how many people like me have come up and had this 
attitude towards what you say. I've seen it happen on several lists 
you've been on. And this exchange is exactly why they do that.

The BS makes a PRONOUNCEMENT. Others, less technically savvy and less 
immersed in the minutiae of computer technology, at first consider the 
pronouncement bizarre. While it makes complete sense to The BS, it 
doesn't fit with what us peons see. Most of us peons just ignore it. But 
sometimes one of us challenges The BS. The BS thinks they're calling him 
a liar or impugning his technical insights or whatever. So The BS 
presses his point even harder. But they're just looking for what 
_they'd_ consider "proof". Unfortunately, none of this forestalls the 
ensuing mininuke explosion.

Just like this present exchange.

I'll say it a third time. I'm not attempting to challenge the idea that 
Microsoft scarfed Java 1.x and used it to make C# and other components 
of .NET. As I said twice before, you could be right, and probably are. 
I'm not attempting to challenge your credibility or your technical 
knowledge, either.

The whole point of this exercise was to determine the basis for what 
you're saying, and whether the utterances could therefore be considered 
fact or opinion. Educated opinion, no matter how educated, does not make 
a fact, even if the opinion is true.

<snip>

> > Can we verify that? Was he just yanking your chain? 
> 
> Hey, you can assume 100% in my e-mail comes out of my ass if
> you want.  I could really care less.
> 

If you didn't care, you wouldn't respond. ;-}

<snip>

> > People lie, mis-remember, make things up to fill in gaps or
> > to enhance their own reputations or avoid trouble all the
> > time.
> 
> Feel free to assume this about me.
> 

Don't be paranoid. I'm not even implying anything of the sort about you.

> You're talking in absolutes.
> I honestly don't know what you want or think.
> 

You can think of it as absolutes if you like. What you're considering a 
fact, I consider an educated opinion from a semi-insider.

> CASE-IN-POINT ...
> 
> Is your viewpoint to state that Microsoft threw away all Java
> source code, all their existing J++ work, all their existing
> native Win32 interfaces and run-times that were based on Java
> 1.1 source code and created C#/.NET as "clean room"?

Heh, for all I know, Microsoft bought C# from a shop in Seattle and paid 
the guy $50,000 for it, just like DOS. I don't know. I have no proof 
either way. The fact that they had access to Java 1.x source and they 
subsequently developed something very much like it called C# doesn't 
prove the two things have any relation. Yes, logically it makes sense 
that the two things are related. But that's not proof. I'd say there's 
maybe a 95% probability, but that doesn't make it a fact.

I'll give _you_ an analogy. I've been listening to these health food 
people for years. I'm constantly astounded by the kind of things they 
pass off as facts. There's one lady (a doctor) who wrote a book claiming 
that the cause of cancer is isopropol alcohol. She dissects people with 
cancer and always finds isopropol alcohol in cancerous tissues. 
Therefore, cancer is caused by isopropol alcohol. This is passed off as 
FACT by someone who should be in a position to know. And yet the truth 
is that it's an opinion, and a weakly justified one at that. Years ago, 
it was wheat grass that was going to cure everything. Then it was super 
blue-green algae. All presented as facts by people who've studied a lot 
more than I have about these things. It's almost like a spectator sport 
now, to watch these people and marvel at what they come up with next to 
believe in. And the funny thing is that the health food people I know 
are the sickest people I know.

Another analogy, also in the medical field. At one point, doctors and 
studies decided that salt was bad for you. A few years later, it was 
found that, no, salt is good for you. Same thing with eggs. Same thing 
with alcohol. Pick something you eat, and some study somewhere has 
probably shown it was bad for you. Wait a few years, and another study 
will show the exact opposite. Two contrary facts means one's false. And 
this isn't just one guy telling another guy(s) something's true. This is 
guys with years of schooling and millions of dollars behind their 
research. Don't tell me about what a racket medical research is. That's 
not the point. The point is that here are "experts" saying one thing 
today and quite another tomorrow. Their "facts" aren't facts.

I'm not trying to impugn anyone's character. But I've been lied to 
enough that I've developed an extremely thick skepticism. When someone 
says something's a fact which seems odd to me, I get very interested in 
what I'd term "proof" for that fact. If you think such proof involves 
"absolutes", I'm okay with that. I'm willing to take a lot of things on 
faith (how do I know China exists? I've never been there); I just want 
to know if my faith is based on fact or opinion.

I'll leave you alone now. I just wanted to satisfy myself on this point 
of fact versus opinion, generally, and specifically with regard to the 
Java/C# thing. I'm satisfied. You can continue to argue about it if you 
like. ;-}

Paul