Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- From: "IanH" <none@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 Aug 2005 02:52:27 -0700
John Kaster (Borland) wrote:
> Scott Roberts wrote:
>
> > So if it's obvious - and in fact mandatory - why did he mention it?
>
> To state the obvious to those people who don't know it's obvious.
This is not the job of the chief exec.
If he wanted to enlighten the clueless, he should spend more time here
;-)
If he wanted to reaffirm commitment to development tools, he could have.
And he chose not to.
This continued emphasis on development tools purely as a means of
funding SDO is a clear signal of intent.
At what point will a lump sum for selling off dev tools be seen as a
better funding option than continued milking?
Ian
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- From: John Kaster (Borland)
- Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- References:
- Yet Another Arnold Article
- From: Angra Mainyu
- Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- From: Wayne Niddery [TeamB]
- Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- From: Scott Roberts
- Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- From: John Kaster (Borland)
- Yet Another Arnold Article
- Prev by Date: Re: Danny Thorpe on Unicode and VCL
- Next by Date: Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- Previous by thread: Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- Next by thread: Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
- Index(es):