Re: Things that Longhorn seems to be doing right

From: "Thorsten Körner" <thorstenkoerner@123tkshop.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Things that Longhorn seems to be doing right
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 11:27:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200310301037.14609.t.koerner@123tk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031030013418.GD3094@digitasaru.net>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hallo Joseph
Am Donnerstag, 30. Oktober 2003 02:34 schrieb Joseph Pingenot:
> From Neil Brown on Thursday, 30 October, 2003:
> >On Wednesday October 29, trelane@digitasaru.net wrote:
> >> Regardless, it's an interesting idea, and one which might be
> >> fruitful. I give you then two bits: our treatment of the tech
> >> and the reality of their tech:
> >> 00: ISVAPOR | TAKESEROUSLY
> >> 01: ISVAPOR | IGNORE
> >> 10: NOTVAPOR | TAKESERIOUSLY
> >> 11: NOTVAPOR | IGNORE
> >> If we come up with a working implementation and it *is* just
> >> vaporware, then we're ahead.
> >> We're way ahead.
> >> If we merely dismiss it as vaporware and it turns out to be,
> >> no net change.
> >
> >...snip...
> >
> >> Conclusion: best to take it seriously and work on it; those
> >> two cases are the most optimal.
> >
> >Sounds like the same argument that is used in "Pascal's Wager"
> > for belief in God, and I seriously don't think the argument
> > works in either case.  (note that I'm not making a statement
> > about the conclusion in either case, only about the arguement).
>
> "Sounds like?"  Sure.  It kind of does, now that you mention it.
>
> Regradless of the similarities and the validity of Pascal's
> argument, my argument, I think, stands.  I outlined the four
> potential futures.  We have control over only one bit, Microsoft
> has the other.  The tech sounds nice, it is an interesting avenue
> to persue, Pascal aside.
You are absolutley right. It seems to be more than just an
interesting tech. It sounds like a really outstanding idea. And
noone should say it's a bad idea, because it's from Microsoft (tm).
They have had many good ideas (also many bad implementations of
them).
>
> I don't see any reason why we *shouldn't* look at the problem and
> try to do it.  What reasons do you see for not persuing the
> problem to its inevitible implementation?
ACK

CU

Thorsten

- --
Thorsten Körner			|  e-Commerce-Consulting
Dannenkoppel 51 		|  D-22391 Hamburg
Tel.: 040/536 308 27		|  Fax.: 040/536 308 26
mailto:t.koerner@123tk.com	|  http://www.123tk.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/oOd0s5R35vLkl/cRAp20AJ9PmBjKqnX5f8l9CaQZGGPBEa0vSQCgqEP3
O+OPB2lVef6BGSc3Ay672Ew=
=sZjd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----