Microsoft have for the last several years by their actions and words basically told us C++ developers "piss off, you're unwanted, use VB or something - besides, we're too incompetent to create a C++ compiler".
The reason they got their C++ compiler to a decent state at all at the time (around 1995? take or leave a few years) was that they managed to buy Borland C++ developers. On their own they were a total disaster up to that buy.
Some years later they released MSVC 6.0, the newest and greatest. Well what do you know, it was basically a service-pack for MSVC 5.0 (and also using the HTML MSDN-viewer that made the old Media Viewer MVB look and act like heaven! Have you ever seen a slower help-system on Windows than their HTML stuff?).
Then they, righfully, got flamed and bashed all over the place for creating a "C++" compiler with such lousy support for the C++ language, that it a year after its release was the laughing stock and you could read in post after post to e.g. c.l.c++.m "It's MSVC", "MSVC bug", "Microsoft compiler bug"... After many years of this abuse and proven inability and unwillingness to care about C++, obviously it's more than hard to respect or believe in that company when it comes to C++ compilers (judging from the microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vc NG VC7 is also a pig, and it seems there's a growing mass that deliberately stays away from it at least another dot-release until, if ever, MS get their act together).
Now they in quick succession hires (previously?) credible people to do... Exactly what? Convince people they're committed to C++? Calm the masses? Put oil on the waves?
Are they (MS) really expecting us to believe that they are seriously trying to conform to an international standard, when they during their whole existance only displayed their good for one thing, and making compilers isn't one of those things?
If, becuse I'd be a damned fool to say "when", they ever display something resembling a C++ 98 compiler, I can bet my furry ass that it's after the C++0x standard has been ratified.
They are proven liars, cheaters, monopoly, incompetent, and just about every other foul word you can come to think of. Do they expect us to hang on to their crap with just the hope that these people will change anything?!
Herb: I'm truly sorry to see you have to go this way, but I guess we all have to eat...
- Any 'net transmitted diseases are promoted by Microsoft
Too bad this rant doesn't have much to do with reality.
I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
Mike Nordell wrote: They are proven liars, cheaters, monopoly, incompetent, and just about every other foul word you can come to think of. Do they expect us to hang on to their crap with just the hope that these people will change anything?!
If you feel this strongly, why are you here ?
The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little.
"I'm thinking of getting married for companionship and so I have someone to cook and clean." - Martin Marvinski, 6/3/2002
I don't see it as selling out. I'm a mercenary - absolute loyalty to the highest bidder. For many, many years now, the jobs have been with VC++, so that's where I've been. I started on Borland Turbo C 1.0 (DOS). If there was more work there, I'd be in the Borland camp. For that matter, if it was where the jobs were, I'd be coding for Macs. I love programming, but this ain't religion - it's how I pay my bills. When I'm feeling philosophical, I go home, take the phone off the hook and code what I feel like playing with. However, I look after my livelihood not with idealism, but with common sense.
I must say one other thing. I often disagree with what they do, or how they do it. However (er, much like America), they seem to be the company that everyone loves to hate, primarily because they were so hugely successful. When they were the half dozen scruffy looking hippies going up against IBM, we all loved them because they were chasing the American Dream. However, once they achieved it (the little guy kicks Big Blue's tail), we hate them. So who's the hypocrite here?
A business, any business, has one goal and priority - profitability. That's why they exist. Market domination and the elimination of competition is a path to that goal. Business is war. Microsoft didn't create that reality - they just have to cope with it. You can be sure that their competition would have done exactly the same to them were they able.
Actually, a good portion of what he said wasn't true. VC 6 predated the standard, so claiming it wasn't standards conforming is a bit off. In point of fact, when released it came closer to the then draft standard then any other C++ compiler on the Windows platform. Even starting with VC 5 they had hired Mr. Plauger, an industry recognized C++ expert and member of the standards committee, to develop their standard library. These facts don't fit with the claims made by the OP.
In more recent years I've felt like MS had given up on C++, and in general in the past standards were only good so far as MS could find a way to make them help their bottom line (in other words, I believe VC++ became as standards conforming as it did with VC 5 and 6 in order to gain market share over Borland, and once that was accomplished we saw the diminishing interest in the standard).
As for Mr. Sutter selling out... not a chance. Again, many on the standards committee are sensing a change in MS, and this, I'm sure, is what compelled him to join. I suppose it's possible that MS is snowing us (I don't think so... I've talked to enough key people to believe otherwise), but if that's the case it just means Mr. Sutter was fooled, not that he sold out. I think you should be more careful with accusations like this... it's one thing to level it at a company and quite another to do so at an individual in a public forum.
BTW, the scuttlebut is that 7.1 compiles a lot of the Boost libraries with out the need for the current VC hacks, and if this is true there's no reason to question if they are striving for compliance.
I did C++ for about 7-8 years and a really love it. But now, in the company I work for, there was a shift to C#. Personaly I didn't like COM and I don't like MC++, because that it's not c++, it's pure garbage. But as I must do a living I must work in C#...
I don't think that Microsoft has plans for c++, as they keep throwing to us all this .Net thing...
Last Visit: 31-Dec-99 19:00 Last Update: 3-May-15 14:49