Ranting about the state of Python IDEs for Windows

Rob McCrea spaamrobmccreaspremoveam at adelphia.net
Tue Sep 14 23:25:45 CEST 2004

Peter Hansen wrote:

> Rob McCrea wrote:
>> Thomas Heller wrote:
>>> If you work on Windows, you should really, really, really upgrade to
>>> win2k, at least - even if it costs some performance on your machine.
>>> You can even *use* the 'dos-box' then ;-).
>> In my not-at-all-humble-but-very-honest opinion, that's the worst 
>> suggestion I've heard in this topic.
> As Thomas is, I'm very curious why you would say that.  And
> I wonder if you would say that if you replaced 2K with XP,
> or whether you are just against anyone switching from 98
> to something better *if they have to work with Windows*
> as Thomas clearly qualified the point.
> For the record, switching from 98 to XP has been an incredibly
> helpful upgrade in my own case, and I can't think why you
> would make the comment you made.
> -Peter

If moving to anything after win98se, I would (of course?) suggest XP, 
but certainly not for a 500mHz with 64MB RAM.  "if it costs some 
performance" is a huge understatement.   And I just hate the allusion of 
the console window to anything close to DOS, which I can assume was not 
intended and Thomas even tried to avoid.

My reply was biased and not at all "scientific", as I hoped my "opinion" 
line would indicate.  Maybe my personal summary is that there are only 
two Windows operating systems, 98SE and XPPro; all the others have been 
surpassed, IMHO.  And let's make no mistake, XP did also (finally) 
surpass 98, at a huge (yet affordable and worthwhile) cost to system 
resources. -- But 98 is a still a practically needed link between 
Windows and DOS.

So you're rather astute, Peter.  If he had said XP, and didn't mention 
"performance" since XP would almost mandate a more-than-modest system 
upgrade, and lastly did not mention the term "dos-box" (even if said 
facetiously in regards to that certain perspective of mine), I can't 
imagine I would have tossed out my two cent.

I suppose I should mention that no disrespect at all was intended 
towards Thomas' sound intention, though I found the given implementation 
  to be "really, really, really" unsatisfactory.

Rock on, peace,

More information about the Python-list mailing list