Quote:
Originally Posted by S.T.A.R.S.
I agree with you 100%,but when I compare new things with older ones,everything is so easy.Programming some things under new language environments on new OS is much easier then on the old ones.And the reason why I like older ones is that if you learn to do something on harder way,it's much easier later when you start with the newest ones.
But don't think that I am not trying new things.I ALWAYS try new things like new OS and new VS versions.But most of the time,I come back to the old ones because on new things everything seems so easy lol.And I hate when something is easy.Don't ask me why lol. 
Let's take for example VS 2002 and VS 2008.To make the same thing in VS 2002 you need to lose much more time then in VS 2008.BUT when you finally finish the product in the VS 2002 after all that HARD and LONG work,somehow I feel good and that it was worth all that time and work.
Just 2 weeks ago I was watching the differences between VS 2002 and VS 2008.I admit that the VS 2008 is much better with the .NET 3.5 SP1 for the difference of the VS 2002 with the .NET 1.0 SP3,but in VS 2008 everything is so easier and faster to make...whatever that is.In VS 2002 is harder and that is exactly what I want.I know I know...this is tupid I know.But I am just afraid that I won't be good programmer if I use just the newest VS 2008 considering that most of the things are so simple for the difference of VS 2002.
Also VS 2008 doesn't support old OS.Ok I know that NOBODY is almost not using those retired OS,but somehow I wouldn't feel good if I know that my programs will work ONLY on new OS. 
Windows 7 and VS 2008 rocks.I FULLY agree with that.But let's just say that I am one of those guys who like to do the same thing on more harder and longer way.But let's make one thing clear lol.If the VS 2008 support old OS starting from at least Windows 98 FE and that it's application's size is just like those in VS 2002,then yeah...I would be deffinetly using VS 2008.Otherwise I will probably stick with the version 2002.BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT I AM NOT FOLLOWING ALL THE NEW THINGS LOL.BECAUSE I DO.How the hell would then I get the new ideas lol? Hehe... 
Anyway if you ask me VS 2008 is deffinetly the best of all VS versions starting from VS 97.But then again with VS 2002 you can make most things if you lose much time trying to make that... |
Whilst that's quite an impressive worth ethic you have there S.T.A.R.S there does come a point where it just becomes pointless torture. For instance at the start when you learn something then yes it's a good idea to take the longest path and repeat the same boring process over and over again. And even in life taking the harder path rather than the easy one is admirable.
However in your case you've learnt it all allready, there's no more point to the continuous training as it won't make you any better, it will just waste your time, time which you should spend on adding additional features and optimizing code.
VS2008 is not easier, it's goal is not to create lazy shortcuts, it's goal is to be more efficient. Efficiency means it takes you less time to make something equally as good or perhaps even better as something which takes longer which then leaves you with time to concentrate on other things, like additional features to the app.
Also why are you worried about compatibility with older OSs? First of all it's impossible to make everyone from Win 95 to Win 7 happy...what may run great on older systems may make certain calls not supported on newer systems and vice versa...and even if you manage to make all the windows users happy you're still being an inconsiderate ass cuz it's not been ported to Linux or Mac OS yet...
Secondly you almost never release apps to the public, you said yourself you make them all for yourself...so you're worrying about making people happy who will never even get to use your apps...and that's just pointless and unnecessary torture.
If Win 7 is your main OS then you code for Win 7 and be happy and use the time you saved to add additional features or work on the next app or optimize the current one. And then if you ever want to then use the app on another OS and it does not work, then you simply paste the source code into a text file and load it in that OS and compile it with changes to make it compatible which someone like you should be able to do in a jiffy.
This could be by the way why we are so unimpressed by the UAC browser...eventhough it may have taken you thousands of lines of codes and hours and hours of work because we are used to the highly efficient and flashy apps produced by the newer more efficient Coding packages it just seems like you don't wtf you're doing and just got slightly past the "hello world" type program and are now feeling special and that you can code anything brilliantly whilst when looking at our current apps it looks archaic and like a horrible piece of crap.
Instead of worrying so much about your work ethic try worrying more about what that work achieves, about the actual end product. Sure it's rewarding doing the same thing with older equipment that should not be able to do it, but it can be just as rewarding to create something amazing, something new, something fresh, something flashy and all of this in an entirely lightweight resource friendly package.
Instead of limiting yourself to practices of the past, try taking the sky as your new limit and just go nuts.
Let me give you a different example, a car from 80s has a top speed of say 160 km/h, and so does a modern car. So sweet the car from the 80s is just as good as the car of today, I mean they go just as fast....but is it really? There's other things to consider as well, prices of spare parts...in fact are parts for the older car even still available?...the fuel efficiency of the two cars may be different, the engine in the old car may struggle to get up really steep hills, there's no air conditioning in the old car...in fact no comfort features at all...the ride is also much harder in the old car plus it has no power steering...it has no airbags...then there's the emissions you gotta worry about, the old car will probably be far less environmentally friendly than the new one...and there's more but I think I listed enough for now.
So the actually it would seem the new car is better, it gets better mileage, it's comfier, it's more efficient. So you could pick the old car, but that would be unnecessary torture...you would have to worry about high spare part costs, higher fuel costs as you have to refill more often due bad mileage, a rougher and comfortless ride, if there's lots of hills then you may arrive late...and last but not least you will have treehuggers harassing you that your car is not green enough (I won't even mention that you're more likely to day in a crash in the old car than the new one)...so unless you're a masochist it's foolhardy to drive the old car 24/7 and you're much better off with the new car. If you like you can of course now and then take the old car for a spin to relive the good old days but anymore would be masochistic torture.
__________________
Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83Ghz stock) | ASUS P5Q | 2x2GB Transcend JetRam DDR2-800 | ASUS ENGTX260\HDTP\896M | Windows Vista Home Premium 64bit SP1
The Champ has retired but may his Legacy live on FOREVER !!!!
Get it right fools! The glass is HALF-EMPTY, not half-full!!!
!!! WARNING: Emulation requires a brain !!! WARNING: Emulation =/= Piracy !!!
Last edited by SCHUMI_4EVER; June 7th, 2009 at 04:04..