Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3 
Author Message
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3

In this case Phil I am referring to the two protagonists from FiveWin and
FiveDock and FiveWhatever... One went one way and the other largely went
toward harbour. I probably used "Harbour" a little too loosely in that
context.  In any event I am not much interested in Open Source projects and
I am very much less interested in ones involving Clipper.

But if you are party to the original protagonists and the cap fits, please
wear it. If you are not, please {*filter*}out.

Geoff


Quote:

> > Both FiveWin and Harbour are truly terrible products managed by truly
> > terrible people. Please give us a wide berth with such comments!

> I'm the manager of the Harbour Project.

> How did you come to the conclusion that I am truly terrible?

> I'd like an explanation of your libelous remark.



Wed, 12 May 2004 14:38:54 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Geoff,

This is supposed to be a software help group.. and specifically Visual
Objects.

So you throw a couple of "Hand grenades" over the wall and then when your
target(s) pay you a visit you want sympathy or even better we ignore that it
ever happened.

You are a real Wally at times..

Phil McGuinness
-------------------


Quote:
> In this case Phil I am referring to the two protagonists from FiveWin and
> FiveDock and FiveWhatever... One went one way and the other largely went
> toward harbour. I probably used "Harbour" a little too loosely in that
> context.  In any event I am not much interested in Open Source projects
and
> I am very much less interested in ones involving Clipper.

> But if you are party to the original protagonists and the cap fits, please
> wear it. If you are not, please {*filter*}out.

> Geoff




> > > Both FiveWin and Harbour are truly terrible products managed by truly
> > > terrible people. Please give us a wide berth with such comments!

> > I'm the manager of the Harbour Project.

> > How did you come to the conclusion that I am truly terrible?

> > I'd like an explanation of your libelous remark.



Wed, 12 May 2004 15:20:02 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Geoff,

Quote:
> toward harbour. I probably used "Harbour" a little too loosely in that
> context.

Actually, that you used it at all was probably out of order.

Harbour, to my knowledge, had nothing whatsoever to do with the legal battle
betiween FiveWin and Clip4Win. IIRC, the Harbour project had not even started
when that legal battle was being waged.

That some of the protagonists went on to other things - including Harbour - is
irrellevant. We all move on from one project to another, n'est pas?

And that they're involved in Harbour, or that Bill sued Bob, says little,
really, about the type of people involved.

If you feel that somebody had stolen your intellectual property, I'm confident
that you'd be looking to seek some form of redress. Whether that would be legal
action is not the issue; it's simply the course that these individuals took in
this instance. I don't defend it; but equally I don't know enough of the facts.

I suspect that you too don't know enough of the facts, and I do feel that some
of your comments have been way out of line.

Even for you.

<g>

Quote:
> In any event I am not much interested in Open Source projects and
> I am very much less interested in ones involving Clipper.

> But if you are party to the original protagonists and the cap fits, please
> wear it. If you are not, please {*filter*}out.

> Geoff




> > > Both FiveWin and Harbour are truly terrible products managed by truly
> > > terrible people. Please give us a wide berth with such comments!

> > I'm the manager of the Harbour Project.

> > How did you come to the conclusion that I am truly terrible?

> > I'd like an explanation of your libelous remark.

--
g.
Gary Stark

http://www.*-*-*.com/


Wed, 12 May 2004 15:35:07 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Reading the long thread here I have come to a conclusion that
afterall Geoff is a (never) successful VO salesman because the product
perhaps is not salable, is he not ?

He really needs help, psychologically. Please do not let him sink into
deeper desperation. Those calling themselves Clipperheads should try
their best to enlighten him.

Geoff, you have my symphaty. May gods bring you lights.

What a pitty .........

Just my 2 cents.

<URL: http://harbour.da.ru>
<URL: http://andijahja.da.ru>



Wed, 12 May 2004 15:53:03 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3

Quote:
> > Any chance of the slightly more verbose technical review of harbour?

> No, not really, we've done this before. I am a windows developer and I
> don't believe in Open Source.

What does being a Windows developer have to do with your belief in Open
Source?

Quote:
>                         Harbour is way off beam as a Win32 platform
> development tool (almost by definition) and I have no interest in Linux or
> O/S2 compatibility.

This is the sort of nonsense I don't get. You seem to have no clue about
harbour, you seem not to with to want to actually discuss it, but you're
quick with insults and judgements. You almost seem proud of your ability to
post vacuous nonsense about things you know little about.

Example: you throw in the parenthetical remark above as if it's a given. The
thing is, it isn't. But, to compound this, you say that you don't wish to
discuss the thought process behind such a remark. This either suggests that
you have some great insight that would take a long time to explain or that
you've not thought about it at all and you're simply putting down something
that you don't understand. Based on your current posting history I find it
hard not to consider the latter as a likely explanation.

Moreover, do you even realise that your lack of a desire for GNU/Linux
support or OS/2 support simply means that those aspects of harbour, or even
harbour itself, isn't suitable for you needs? It doesn't mean that it's
"crap". Or are you a "fox who lost his tail" type of person?

Quote:
>                     Technically its way behind even average needs of
> commercial developers and frankly, I'd rather have seen the thousands of
> hours put into Harbour spent on VO or .net projects.

If that's the case then ask CA to make VO free software, I'm sure the
harbour hackers would love to work on VO instead. But, again, this is a
nonsense because now you seem to think that your desires for how people
should spend their spare time gives you the right to call their efforts
"crap".

Quote:
> I see little point discussing the technical merits of Harbour because I
> don't see a relevant framework for their application.

So, because you're not able to see harbour for what it is and because you
don't understand why it exits you've decided that the best course of action
is to call all the people working on it "terrible people" and you've decided
to call the work they've been doing "crap"?

--
Harbour is a free   | Harbour Web Site: http://www.harbour-project.org/
software, cross     | Harbour FAQ.....: http://www.harbour-project.org/faq/
platform, Clipper   | My Harbour Pages: http://www.davep.org/harbour/
compatible compiler | Harbour News....: http://www.davep.org/harbour/news/



Wed, 12 May 2004 15:59:14 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Geoff


Quote:
> Both FiveWin and Harbour are truly terrible products managed by truly
> terrible people. Please give us a wide berth with such comments!

...cut heaps of squirming...

Quote:

> Huh? I don't have a low opinion of people who work on Harbour. This is
> something you have invented to support your {*filter*}ed ego syndrome.

..cut lots of dodging the issue...

{*filter*}ed ego syndrome! Lets face it Geoff, you insulted the developers
of  Harbour,  two of whom have now asked for an apology. Apologise?
No, not our Geoff; his ego doesn't run to admitting he might have been
wrong.

Despite your rather lame (and cringing) attempt to salvage
some face by referring to the dictionary definition, my interpretation,
and I think others share it, was that it was an insult thrown out
by someone who clearly hadn't a clue about Harbour.

Personally, I really thought that this was one time where you
would apologise for a hasty posting. Had you done so, my respect
for you would have improved....

...If only you could just stick to giving this ng the excellent technical
support on VO that we all respect......

Cheers..

Will



Wed, 12 May 2004 16:35:39 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3

Quote:
> > And then some. It's more than an overstatement, it's out and out abuse
> > directed at people who you don't even seem to know. You've still not
> > said why you think I'm a terrible person. Perhaps you'd be kind enough
> > to

> Abuse? You are over-sensitive. Please look up the dictionary for
> "terrible" and then apply appropriate colloquial meanings.

Which colloquial meaning would that be? Is it a colloquial meaning that
isn't negated by being prefixed with "truly"? Or perhaps it's a colloquial
meaning that is highlighted by that prefix? Either way I'm not sure how
we're supposed to see it other than a comment that is supposed to deprecate
the character of the people working on harbour.

Quote:
>                                                            There are many
> other properly demeaning words I could have used but didn't. If "terrible"
> gets up your nose then its time you got out and got a life!

I suppose trying to suggest I don't "have a life" (you know nothing about my
life so I suggest you shut up on that point) is easier than having to face
up to the monumental mistake you've made? Oh well.

Quote:
> > That's a very hollow apology.

> Its the only one I'll make because of the way you seemed to interpret it.
> "terrible" is how I describe the behaviour of a couple of grown men of the
> issues we will go through below.

Please name these "grown men". You do realise that a *lot* of people work on
harbour and no two people can be considered to be the driving force behind
harbour? As such, I'm at a loss as to who these two grown men are that would
cause you to describe harbour as a "terrible product" and the harbour
hackers as "terrible people". Can you name these two people please?

Quote:
>                                  "terrible" is how I describe the attempts
> to represent some products to people as "finished" and technically competent
> products. FiveWin, in particular, is a terrible product. It truly is. I
> realise it was a genuine attempt at Windows but it failed on almost all
> counts and produced very poor applications. If someone stands up to defend
> FiveWin's technical competance then in my opinion they fall into the same
> category. Terrible <g>.

Fine, you dislike FiveWin, I'm not fan either. Why does that then cause you
to describe harbour as a terrible product and the harbour developers as
truely terrible people?

Quote:
> > Do you understand that in attacking those who work on this free software
> > project that you've publicly made a personal attack on a lot of people?

> No, I'm not attacking those people (how on earth can you draw such a
> generalisation!) but I do consider their efforts misguided.

I think this:


| Both FiveWin and Harbour are truly terrible products managed by truly
| terrible people.
`----

speaks for itself. You called me, and a lot of other people, "truly
terrible" people. What is that if it isn't an attack on our character?

Quote:
>                                                             It is an
> opinion on action, not of technical merit.

But you also commented on technical merit:


| But as technical specialists... they ARE terrible.
`----

You've described us as truely terrible people in general and you've spoken
of our technical merit as terrible.

Quote:
>                                    I don't believe in free software or
> Open Source. Such things have a place (Linux has found one but its quite a
> minor place in the overall scheme of things) but Harbour does not. I don't
> think its aims or aspirations are reasonable. I would rather see these
> people work on real projects or help us drive .net for VO etc. This is my
> opinion but I do not (and never have) "attacked" people for their
> involvement in these projects.

Fine, you're welcome to your own opinion about how I should spend my spare
time. I don't have a problem with that. However, when you call my efforts
"crap" with little or no explanation and you call me a "truely terrible
person" with little or no explanation and when you say that I'm "terrible"
as a technical specialist (especially when you know nothing about my work)
it so obviously is an attack.

Quote:
> > Don't you think that those people either deserve a publicly published
> > explanation as to why you'd attack them or, failing that, a public
> > apology and a retraction of the attack?

> They are not under attack.
> Where do you get off with this!


| Both FiveWin and Harbour are truly terrible products managed by truly
| terrible people.
`----

That looks like an attack on our character to me.

Quote:
> > Feud? Both sides? Which feud is this? What sides are these?

> The one you acknowledge below. It resulted in letters and communications
> all round the place.

To the best of my knowledge no mail was sent "all round the place" regarding
the disagreement I have in mind. Can you please explain exactly which
disagreement you have in mind and when it happened? I strongly suspect
you've confusing two very unconnected events.

Quote:
>                      We had a similar thing happen in the VO world a
> little back with a company called "Summer Triangle". Again I was on the
> receiving end of mail purporting to be the facts of one side or the other.
> This is undignified and simply not worthy of professionals.

To the best of my knowledge the harbour development and support crew have
never been involved in anything like this. One or two individuals might have
but what they do in their private life is their business, it has nothing to
do with harbour as a whole. That'd be like me suggesting that the VO
community as a whole likes to insult harbour because one person who appears
to be one of their number has done. It'd be nonsense.

Quote:
> > Which feud regarding harbour was over money? I know of only one such
> > disagreement in the harbour development team and, while on the surface
> > it might seem to have been over money, it was more about a lack of
> > comprehension of copyright and a failure to understand what free
> > software is about. It was efficiently dealt with and corrected and has
> > long since passed into the history of harbour.

> The cause is irrelevant. It drove most people away - certainly the few I
> knew who used FiveWin used the event to switch to something else.

What on Earth are you on about Geoff Schaller? FiveWin has nothing to do
with harbour (other than the tenuous links I've mentioned previously and
which you say you understand).

Quote:
>                                                                   Perhaps
> most people were having difficulty with the product's direction anyway. It
> seemed that product support was considered poor (judging by bulletin
> boards at the time) and that technical suggestions were not well received.
> Does anyone wish to take responsibility for this?

Why are you talking about FiveWin so as to justify your comments about
harbour and the harbour developers?

Quote:
> > Nothing you say here resembles anything to do with harbour. Would you be
> > so kind as to explain what this nonsense means?

> FiveWin, FiveWin, FiveWin.
> Harbour is a side-show. I'm not really interested in it.

You've said otherwise:


| Both FiveWin and Harbour are truly terrible products managed by truly
| terrible people.
`----

You're interested enough to call all of the developers and supporters of
harbour "terrible people". You're interested enough to call their work
"crap" with no actual explanation as to why it is "crap".

Quote:
> > Wrong on two counts. FiveWin isn't free as in freedom or free as in
> > cost. Moreover, FiveWin has nothing to do with harbour other than the
> > fact that FiveTech produce a version of FiveWin that targets harbour and
> > a couple of FiveTech employees contribute to harbour.

> I know this. We are in furious agreement.

So, if you know that FiveWin and harbour are unconnected why are you
blathering on about FiveWin in an effort to justify your remarks about the
harbour developers?

Moreover, why are you suggesting that a disagreement that took place amongst
a couple of harbour developers, on the harbour development mailing list,
earlier this year, is the feud you're thinking of? If you're only talking
about FiveWin then said "feud" can't have had anything to do with harbour's
development this year can it?

Quote:
> > So, tell me Geoff Schaller, from where do you derive a mandate to
> > publicly misrepresent my motivations?

> Am I? Where? Which statement misrepresents you?

The one that the above followed up. Here it is again:


| The products need to be free (but how long has FiveWin been free?) because
| they are merely life extenders for a dying language.
`----

You are suggesting you know the true motivation for harbour's development.

Quote:
> (Was I even talking about you?)

Yes. I work on harbour. You're suggesting that you know the true motivation
for harbour's development, in doing so you're suggesting that you know *my*
motivation for working on harbour. The same goes for everyone who works on
harbour.

So, where do you derive your mandate to publicly misrepresent my
motivations?

Quote:
> Clipper IS certainly a dying language. As is COBOL and fortran. Yes they
> are still in commercial use but time will see their relocation to the
> museum in due course. I can't and won't put a timeframe to it but these
> are definitely dying languages. I can't see any criteria you could apply
> to Clipper to suggest otherwise but please do, if you wish.

A dying language is a language that has no supported compiler vendors.
Clipper, the language, doesn't seem to be in that position yet. I count at
least five not including CA-Clipper. However, if it helps you to think of
harbour as a dying ...

read more »



Wed, 12 May 2004 17:05:55 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Give me crap, I'm in the first 2 <g> with shades at least:

1. people who think the USA us responseible for every bad apple it get back
2. people who think Bill Gates is the computer world's ogre

Geoff Schaller a crit :

Quote:
> enfant terrible...

> (I wish I had your keyboard to put in the appropriate punctuation <g>)

> Some people just get carried away and others, I am also certain, want to be
> offended. In fact I think that some people go out of their way to interpret
> things for maximum offence <g>.

> Sigh!

> But there are also 4 types of people I love to bait:

> 1.  people who think the USA is responsible for every bad apple in the
> world.
> 2.  people who think Bill Gates is the Anti-Christ,
> 3.  people who believe Linux will save the next millenium, and
> 4.  people who think FiveWin is good <g>.

> Cripes! Some people are now complaining that the Harry Potter books threaten
> Christianity!

> Geoff



> > Geoff Schaller a crit :

> > > Well it happens at least once a month to me in here <g>.

> > And I think you like it <g>.

> > Well you are as you are. Everybody knows it or should after all these
> years.
> > I'm always surprise when someone need to repeat his offended words in
> every
> > post. And you have some 'friends' which mostly do so in each of their
> response
> > to you.

> > Please Geoff, call me "terrible". I will be very afraid the day people
> will
> > call me "nice guy". <G>

> > --
> > Jean-Marie Berthiaume
> > Montral, Qubec

> > Attention. Enlever les # pour me rejoindre
> > Please erase the # to reply :


--
Jean-Marie Berthiaume
Montral, Qubec

Attention. Enlever les # pour me rejoindre
Please erase the # to reply :



Thu, 13 May 2004 02:20:08 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3

Quote:




>> > Both FiveWin and Harbour are truly terrible products managed by truly
>> > terrible people. Please give us a wide berth with such comments!

>> I'm the manager of the Harbour Project.

>> How did you come to the conclusion that I am truly terrible?

>> I'd like an explanation of your libelous remark.
> In this case Phil I am referring to the two protagonists from FiveWin
> and FiveDock and FiveWhatever... One went one way and the other largely
> went toward harbour. I probably used "Harbour" a little too loosely in
> that context.  In any event I am not much interested in Open Source
> projects and I am very much less interested in ones involving Clipper.

Fine, then your public apology to the developers of the Harbour Project
will clear this up.

Quote:
> But if you are party to the original protagonists and the cap fits,
> please wear it. If you are not, please {*filter*}out.

I am party to the original protagonist of this thread, namely you.

And, I'm waiting for your public apology for dragging Harbour Project's
name and volunteers into your poorly worded missive.



Thu, 13 May 2004 04:17:40 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
What I f9ind suprising here is that Geoff still seems to follow the
Clipper newsgroup postings, why ???, clearly this must be a waste of
his time.


Thu, 13 May 2004 06:55:27 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3

Quote:

>What I f9ind suprising here is that Geoff still seems to follow the
>Clipper newsgroup postings, why ???, clearly this must be a waste of
>his time.

...if not his, certainly mine!

Reminds me of two oldish sayings that seem appropriate now

1. When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging
2. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't speak.

Over and out.

Ross



Thu, 13 May 2004 07:31:30 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Since many people are already bashing on the same guy. Any further
attemp are just CHEAP SHOT !

Are you saying he is not helping anyone on the Clipper Newsgroup. If he
is helping, well you should better shut your d...

Lawrence a crit :

Quote:
> What I f9ind suprising here is that Geoff still seems to follow the
> Clipper newsgroup postings, why ???, clearly this must be a waste of
> his time.

--
Jean-Marie Berthiaume
Montral, Qubec

Attention. Enlever les # pour me rejoindre
Please erase the # to reply :



Thu, 13 May 2004 07:35:05 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Lawrence

The original post was cross posted to the visual-objects group where Geoff
normally hangs out, no-one has bothered to remove the link when replying to
it (except I did for this one).

--
HTH
Steve Quinn



Thu, 13 May 2004 08:43:24 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Dave,

I am a commercial software developer and I have no interest in the
OpenSource movement whatsoever. Period. I simply do not believe in open
source as a viable technical resource channel. But you cannot and must not
construe this as a criticism of open source nor a judgement of the people
who do believe in it. This is tantamount to the old Cold War "If you not For
me then you are Against me" syndrome. I simply don't believe in its goals.
Stop trying to create a circumstance of conflict.

I will criticise, however, FiveWin's technical credibility and the supposed
technical "enhancements" for Clipper as a Windows development tool as
expressed in harbour. (and yes, before you boringly point out again, this is
only a small part of harbour...) I will continue to criticise the
undignified fight that went on over FiveWin. It deserves critiscism and I am
not alone in this. As for all the other "Harbour people", please keep them
out of this. You seemingly want other people to be outraged and abused where
no abuse exists. Is this just to pick a fight where none exists?

If you don't like this then tough luck!

Geoff



Thu, 13 May 2004 09:34:45 GMT  
 Clipper and Visual Objects - Porting from Clipper 5.3
Are these two guys the two original protagonists in the FiveWin saga? If so,
they are the two who need to apologise to a lot of FiveWin developers out
there. If they are not, then why did they get involved in this discussion.
Do you have a different technical description or experience of FiveWin? If
so then please explain or stay out of the discussion.

Geoff



Thu, 13 May 2004 09:37:38 GMT  
 
 [ 120 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]

 Relevant Pages 
 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software