Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO
From: Doug Scott (dwscott_at_ieee.org)
Date: 01/02/04
- Previous message: Doug Scott: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- In reply to: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Next in thread: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Reply: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 13:22:12 GMT
Peter,
> For a properly designed Network system, synchronisation is NOT a problem.
Sure. Ignoring cost and time delays. Instant information is expensive and
needs to be cost-justified in any sane organisation (mind you there aren't
too many of those around).
--- Doug dwscott@ieee.org
- Previous message: Doug Scott: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- In reply to: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Next in thread: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Reply: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]