Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 29th Jun 2012 18:38 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 524343
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-05-09
It is not a valid argument at all.
Almost all software we depend upon has been implemented in the 80s and 90s.
Java is so 90s; Linux is 90s based in an OS created in the 70s.
Windows is 90s; .NET is 2000s but runs on top of Windows...
The "real world" programming languages were born at 70s and 80s.
So, telling some technology comes from the 90s sounds contemporary and really current... to me.