Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO

From: Peter E.C. Dashwood (dashwood_at_enternet.co.nz)
Date: 01/02/04

Next message: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
Previous message: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
In reply to: Doug Scott: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
Next in thread: Doug Scott: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
Reply: Doug Scott: "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: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 11:36:16 +1300

"Doug Scott" <dwscott@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:VA.000003cd.00df09c4@ieee.org...
> 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).
>

The current trends are for processing power to increase and transaction
costs to decrease. I am speculating on a FUTURE, not what is current.

Pete.