| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
C++ Pioneer Stanley Lippman Joins Microsoft | |
|
||
| Time: 09:28 EST/14:28 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Julien Jay | ||
|
Stanley Lippman, one of the pioneers of the C++ computer programming language, has joined Microsoft as an architect in the Developer and Platform Evangelism Group. Lippman joins a world-renowned developer organization that includes the talents of key technology architect Anders Hejlsberg, inventor of Turbo Pascal and C#. Lippman will engage in product planning and design efforts for Visual C++ .NET, Microsoft's language for building powerful .NET and Windows applications. "Stan Lippman's extensive background with C++ and his stature in the developer community will certainly help drive the direction and strategy for Visual C++ to the next level," said Eric Rudder, senior vice president of Microsoft's Developer and Platform Evangelism Group. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 318 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:52:05 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1124 (165.170.128.65) at 10/19/2001 3:42:58 PM |
| Yea, why don't we have Lippman waste his time working for SUN( on worthless Java) or working for free on Linux. LOL. MS is the best place for his talents. Go MS. |
| #2 By 1124 (165.170.128.65) at 10/19/2001 4:08:02 PM |
|
Comparing MS to the Mafia is like comparing the US to the "Great Satan". It is stupid and cause stupid people to do stupid things and hate a great company for no reason.
Hope I did not use the word stupid too many times. :) |
| #3 By 116 (66.68.169.74) at 10/19/2001 4:38:13 PM |
| So don't use MS or profit from the fruits of their labors. You do not have to use MS products. Noone points a gun to your head and says here you have to use this or you will die. Get over yourself. |
| #4 By 1845 (207.173.73.201) at 10/19/2001 6:11:25 PM |
|
To get ahead in business you have to do your thing better than the other guy or do a thing the other guy hasn't thought of. If you do your thing or things very well or market your things very well, to whom to should we lay blame for your success? Do we stop you if you got to the top fairly? unfairly? If monopoly stifles competition (i'm a programmer, and I would never even think of going off and writing an OS) then does it matter how the monopoly came to be? Business is OK as long as it doesn't do too well?
Maybe we should have fierce competition as we see between Intel and AMD. That is great for the consumer but it is hurting both companies. In fact AMD is scaling back its workforce to be able to afford to compete with Intel. So we don't want businesses to do too badly either otherwise we layoff employees and that's just not good. It seems we have to make a choice what we want and stop pretending to be all great economists that understand "the way things ought to be". Microsoft is still generating profit, paying its employees, hiring new employees, and giving raises and bonuses. That's good for he workforce. Novell is losing value and laying off employees and that is bad for the workforce. If Microsoft disappeared, certainly another greedy CEO would step up with his company to replace them (Larry Ellison and Scott McNeally would likely be first in line). Greed is part of human nature - just look at how many people pirate software. |
| #5 By 1845 (65.0.207.79) at 10/19/2001 9:00:02 PM |
| What do you propose we do about Microsoft's monopoly? I am of the opinion that Microsoft is not hurting the industry. I think that if it weren't for Microsoft, computers would be more a business tool than a consumer play thing. I think that the Microsoft we see today is the product of wise business strategy in conjunction with the will of the market. I don't think they should be punished for that. I also think that soon the "predatory" and "proprietary" nature of Microsoft will be dropped for a new strategy. I think that the market should decide Microsoft's fate not the government. |
| #6 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 10/20/2001 12:35:40 AM |
|
I agree. The industry was in far worse shape before Microsoft came in and became the de-facto standard.
|
| #7 By 1845 (65.0.207.79) at 10/20/2001 2:44:04 AM |
| If capitalism = free market economy, then certainly that is how capitalism can work. If capitalism = government regulation, then no capitalism doesn't work. |
| #8 By 1845 (65.0.207.79) at 10/20/2001 3:51:12 PM |
|
I'm not sure that I see the need for confrontation #27. Let #26 buy the product that suits him best. He, along with all the rest of us, can choose what we want to buy.
#26 I assume you meant anti-trust lawas when you said anti-competition. I suppose it amounts to the same thing anyway. It seems to me that if a law exists that states what is behaivorally lawful for a company, then the government is regulating that company. I don't mean regulating the way most utilities are - you can only charge this much for these services and so forth. I think the government has a duty mandated in the Constitution to ensure certain freedoms. I'm not sure I agree that it should put its nose into business practices that way it has. I received an email yesterday which illustrates my point very well. ** After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000, President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. Maybe if Clinton had kept his promise, an estimated 7,000 people would be alive today. This question was raised on a Philly radio call-in show. Without casting stones, it is a legitimate question. There are two men, both extremely wealthy. One develops relatively cheap software and gives hundreds of millions of dollars to charity. The other sponsors terrorism. That being the case, why is it that the US government has spent more money chasing down Bill Gates over the past ten years than Osama bin Laden? ** Something to think about. |
| #9 By 1845 (65.0.207.79) at 10/21/2001 2:36:08 AM |
| I'm not sure that nothing big will happen to Microsoft. I just think that if something happens it should be via the force of the market, not the force of the government. |
| #10 By 1845 (65.0.207.79) at 10/21/2001 9:08:33 PM |
| I'm not saying that the consumer should make the decision whether Microsoft did anything illegal. I'm saying that we shouldn't have anti-trust laws. Anti-trust laws interfere with a free market economy. If there were no anti-trust laws, it would be a question of what the consumer wants, not a question of which company the government will attack (assuming the competitors have paid off the government officals, that is). |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 318 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:52:06 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
