• To: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@m...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You
• From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 08:56:06 -0700
• Thread-index: AcJeTmEnTqb2xiEpTXulYcj3YXO22wAFD2Jw
• Thread-topic: Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You

A Buick is not better designed than a Mercedes unless your only criteria
for better design is cheaper.  

-- 
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM 
Reality's the only obstacle to happiness..       

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. 

>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@m...] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:27 AM
> To: xml-dev@l...
> 
> 
> If it's both cheaper and easier to drive, then I think the 
> Buick is better designed. This assumes the use case for both 
> cars are standard American highways and city roads and not 
> the Indy 500. The only other factor that might argue in favor 
> of the Mercedes design would be repair history and tendency 
> to break down, but ease of use is a real concern, and one all 
> too often overlooked in design.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Fwd: The problems with Xlink for integration langu
• Next by Date: FW: Re: Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You
• Previous by thread: RE: Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You
• Next by thread: RE: Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread