From: "Paul Ranson" 

You do have a rather narrow view of what might comprise an application.

But apart from that if it's not an adequate tool technically it's not going
to be right commercially or financially. Politics will cause projects to
fail, so what's right politically is independent of all else, especially a
successful result.

Paul

"Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
news:429331da{at}w3.nls.net...
> Paul Ranson wrote:
>> I don't see a contradiction.
>>
>
> "Right tools" means what?
>
> Right politically?
> Right financially?
> Right for the person suggesting it?
> Right given existing systems?
> Right for future proofing?
> Right for the skills base your empoyees already have?
> Right for the skills your employees want to learn?
> Right for the decisions taken by a far off hq of the company of which your
> company is but one division?
>
> Most tooling can do most of what is required by most systems. I've done
> Java/J2EE & C#/.net & the diffference is....????
>
> Basically you're glueing people to transportable data (as an ML (usually
> XML)) fired as text over tcp via some std mechanism (e.g. http) to
> something wot either puts stuff into or pulls stuff out of structured
> storage (an SQL DB).
>
> Delphi can do that, C++ can do that, Java can do that, C#/.Net can do
> that, Python can do that, Perl can do that etc.etc.etc.
>
> So it's never the right tool in the techie sense but always "do we want to
> be bound hand & foot to MS"? Or to AIX/*ix? or...or...or
etc." Followed by
> "what are the costs & risks?" etc.etc. In there
somewhere there will be "I
> need something which can make me look good (as a manager" (e.g. tight
> timescales etc)) vs another person's "I need something which will look
> good on the CV & thus I want to try the new & hot".
>
> The right tool for the task technically might be the wrong tool for the
> task financialy or politically or in terms of skills (&/or aspirations of
> skills)
>
>
> etc.
>
> Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5