Re: ASP or EXE ?
From: Trevor de Koekkoek (trevor_at_aspevia.com)
Date: 04/06/04
- Next message: Clay Shannon: "Re: My predictions for 2004-2005"
- Previous message: Rhys Sage: "Re: We're not real programmers"
- In reply to: Craig Stuntz [TeamB]: "Re: ASP or EXE ?"
- Next in thread: Juan Jimenez: "Re: ASP or EXE ?"
- Reply: Juan Jimenez: "Re: ASP or EXE ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 17:27:24 -0400
"Craig Stuntz [TeamB]" <cstuntz@nospam.please [a.k.a. vertexsoftware.com]>
wrote in message news:407315ec$1@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Trevor de Koekkoek wrote:
>
> > > Sorry, but that's simply not true. I've seen some terrific web app
> > > UI's that leave the best Win32 UI's in the dust.
> >
> > I'm sorry this is a logical impossibility. Since a Win32 application
> > can include everything that a web application can include [...]
>
> No, it's not impossible, because "can" and "did" are two different
> things.
>
Indeed, but his statement is that the web app UI's leave the "best Win32 UIs
in the dust". Unless he has actually seen all Win32 apps, I take his
meaning to include the best _possible_ Win32 apps, and that would imply
"can"
-Trevor
- Next message: Clay Shannon: "Re: My predictions for 2004-2005"
- Previous message: Rhys Sage: "Re: We're not real programmers"
- In reply to: Craig Stuntz [TeamB]: "Re: ASP or EXE ?"
- Next in thread: Juan Jimenez: "Re: ASP or EXE ?"
- Reply: Juan Jimenez: "Re: ASP or EXE ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
