What's The Verdict, Web or Not?

[Bill Marriott]

What a non-sequiter, Richard... Whether they are or not is irrelevant; 
"won't get it" and "don't need it" are two separate states and shouldn't be 
jumbled up.

It's as if I said, "Driving 120 miles per hour may be unsafe, but it's not 
impossible" and you replied, "But people want to drive at different speeds."

Obviously for whatever motives, some people aren't enthusiastic about a 
browser plug-in that could run Rev code. [Hey, some people apparently don't 
like chocolate and peanut butter together, either.]

That is fine, but don't dismiss it on spurious "technical" grounds, because 
there really aren't any. (Or at least not any more than any other comparable 
plug-in.)

Actually... as long as we've migrated to speed metaphors... the whole debate 
reminds me of a series of commercials for Comcast internet. This series 
features a pair of turtles, called the "Slowskys," who love DSL so much that 
they've become DSL's national spoke-turtles. [The joke/selling point is that 
Comcast cable is 8x faster than DSL.] As you can imagine, the Slowskys don't 
like things fast.

http://theslowskys.com/

Anyway, I wouldn't worry about a browser plug-in. This whole "web" thing is 
just a fad that will be over before you know it. CD-ROMS, that's the future.

>> I just hope that people don't confuse "won't get it" with
>> "don't need it"
>
> Have you considered the possibility that your needs may be different from 
> others'?