"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote

| :-) I wasn't even /hinting/ at an interactive GUI, but just being able to
| do simple stuff like a Yes/No (or alike) question (MsgBox in VBS).
| And that's why they invented the WSH. It's understandable
that you're used to DOS and like to stick with what's familiar,
but WSH, now more than 20 years old, was basically updating DOS
for the graphical OS.

But then they started going backward again with PowerShell.
Why? Because they're trying to make Windows servers attractive
to Linux console window fanatics, so they invented a clunky,
command-line system of applets, like the Linux shells use. It's
not because PS was the most sensible design.

| As for an HTA ? If I want to spend time at create an actual GUI I can as
| well write a program. Way more flexible and not an god-awfull mess of GUI
| elements mixed with code.
| An HTA is a GUI program. It's just simpler than compiled code,
and powered by script, for those situations where you need to keep
the script alive and/or need interaction. It's not for everyone,
especially if you don't do web design, but I use them because
they're fun and simple to write. For example, on my desktop I have
an email database, a youtube-dl frontend, a javascript de-obfuscator,
an HTML reader that allows me to make edits to the webpage
as I read, an image viewer for folders, and even a Win7 SDK
help viewer. All HTAs. Plus several others. I've written more complicated
HTAs. A COM object viewer. An image editor using WIA. An
MSI file unpacker. Writing those as software is far more complicated
and often unnecessary.

So HTAs fill a niche. And the ability to use COM objects makes
them almost as flexible as compiled software, except where speed is
needed. To my mind, IE and COM were both brilliant inventions.
I would never let IE online, but for HTAs it's a lot of fun and
extremely adaptable.

But I think a lot of people agree with you. Many programmers are
math people and not very visual/design oriented. They don't like
GUIs. Many don't even feel much affinity with language. Thus,
Linux: Lots of console windows and no docs.

On 12/16/2021 3:29 PM, Mayayana wrote:
> "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote
>
> | Wow, someone who knows that "myriad" shouldn't be followed by "of"!
> | Excellent. (Like "comprises"/"comprised".)
>
> It's always a special thrill to be complimented on
> my use of English by a Brit. :)

I see your smiley, but perhaps you really feel that way.

I don't feel that way. British English is somewhat different from
American English, but as far as I'm concerned, neither is better than
the other.

Mayayana,

> And that's why they invented the WSH.

I'm afraid you're fully missing the point there. CSH /could/ rather easily
have had something similar, but it hasn't.

> It's understandable that you're used to DOS and like to stick with
> what's familiar,

You should know better than that. I remember you responding to a number of
my Win32 related questions (in comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32). And
yes, most of those related to GUI programs.

> An HTA is a GUI program. It's just simpler than compiled code,
> and powered by script, for those situations where you need to keep
> the script alive and/or need interaction.

Pardon my crudeness, but why are you explaining (mansplaining?) that to me ?
I thought I'd already indicated that I know what it is - and why I do not
really like it.

> But I think a lot of people agree with you. Many programmers are
> math people and not very visual/design oriented.

I'm afraid I've said nothing in that regard to agree with, and its just how
you look at me. And as indicated in the above, I don't think you've done me
right.

Also, as I think you have still a lot to offer me in regard to programming
advice (we might not always agree with each other, but even that has its
worth) I'm not willing to continue this line of conversation.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

"Ken Blake" <Ken@invalidinvalid.com> wrote

| > It's always a special thrill to be complimented on
| > my use of English by a Brit. :)
| |
| I see your smiley, but perhaps you really feel that way.
| | I don't feel that way. British English is somewhat different from
| American English, but as far as I'm concerned, neither is better than
| the other.
|

It was meant as a joke of sorts. I wasn't thinking of
differences. I was thinking of the way that Brits take
pride in their language and often treat it as an art form.
For us it's the language we speak. For them it's their
heritage.

Interestingly, last week I watched "Venus", with Peter
O'Toole, Vanessa Redgrave, and a young actress with a
working class accent. It was an interesting juxtaposition.
Peter O'Toole spoke so articulately that it was a pleasure
to listen to anything he said. Inflection, timing.... his was
a perfect presentation. The young woman was portrayed
with one of the worst British accents. Cockney, maybe?
Sloppy, blurting, and full of mistakes. We have similar
accents in the US, but truly artful speech in the US
is rare. Maybe Gore Vidal? I can't think of anyone else
offhand who I just look forward to them opening their
mouth. It requires emotional sensitivity as well as intellect.

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote

| Also, as I think you have still a lot to offer me in regard to programming
| advice (we might not always agree with each other, but even that has its
| worth) I'm not willing to continue this line of conversation.
|

Not to worry. If I argue with you too much, Carlos
and Frank might get jealous. :)

Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote
>
> | Also, as I think you have still a lot to offer me in regard to programming
> | advice (we might not always agree with each other, but even that has its
> | worth) I'm not willing to continue this line of conversation.
>
> Not to worry. If I argue with you too much, Carlos
> and Frank might get jealous. :)

Nah, we're just enjoying the show and passing the popcorn.

Mayayana,

> Not to worry. If I argue with you too much, Carlos
> and Frank might get jealous. :)

Carlos E.R. ? I recently had a few "conversations" with him myself.

Not really a likable fellow. Has no problem with making up stuff and from
it claiming "you're doing it wrong" as well as rejecting anything that
doesn't fit his narrative.

Ofcourse, once you see thru his trick of agreeing with other peoples
solutions as if he already knew them it becomes kind of funny.

Now I think of it, he reminds me a bit of Dilberts pointy-haired boss :

https://dilbert.com/

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 at 18:59:01, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>> "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote
>>
>> | Also, as I think you have still a lot to offer me in regard to programming
>> | advice (we might not always agree with each other, but even that has its
>> | worth) I'm not willing to continue this line of conversation.
>>
>> Not to worry. If I argue with you too much, Carlos
>> and Frank might get jealous. :)
>
> Nah, we're just enjoying the show and passing the popcorn.

LOL for over a minute, and still chuckling ... thanks!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Correct me if I'm wrong ... everybody else does.

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 at 13:25:54, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>"Ken Blake" <Ken@invalidinvalid.com> wrote
>
>| > It's always a special thrill to be complimented on
>| > my use of English by a Brit. :)
>|
>|
>| I see your smiley, but perhaps you really feel that way.
>|
>| I don't feel that way. British English is somewhat different from
>| American English, but as far as I'm concerned, neither is better than
>| the other.
>|

They both have their irritating aspects! In this case (that "myriad"
shouldn't take "of" [any more than "comprises"/"comprised" do]), I think
both are the same.
>
> It was meant as a joke of sorts. I wasn't thinking of
>differences. I was thinking of the way that Brits take
>pride in their language and often treat it as an art form.
>For us it's the language we speak. For them it's their
>heritage.

That hay have been the case once, and of course some of us still feel it
matters, but you wouldn't need to spend long here to find that a large
proportion of Brits are good at murdering it! And I've found plenty of
USians who _are_ concerned. Probably a similar (small) proportion both
sides, though what they're concerned about is subtly different.
>
> Interestingly, last week I watched "Venus", with Peter
>O'Toole, Vanessa Redgrave, and a young actress with a
>working class accent. It was an interesting juxtaposition.
>Peter O'Toole spoke so articulately that it was a pleasure
>to listen to anything he said. Inflection, timing.... his was
>a perfect presentation.

(I feel the same about Dame Julie.)

> The young woman was portrayed
>with one of the worst British accents. Cockney, maybe?

Could well have been. I'm far from keen on it, but you're not supposed
to knock it - its supposed to be "lovable". (-: [I haven't seen that
film.]

>Sloppy, blurting, and full of mistakes. We have similar
>accents in the US, but truly artful speech in the US
>is rare. Maybe Gore Vidal? I can't think of anyone else
>offhand who I just look forward to them opening their
>mouth. It requires emotional sensitivity as well as intellect.
>
I'm not sufficiently familiar with enough to name one whose speech I
enjoy listening to, though know several authors whose _writing_ I've
enjoyed and at least two whose _lyrics_ I find extremely skilful use of
language.
>
One aspect of American speech that bugs me far more than it should -
after all, it doesn't _matter_ - is the voiced embedded T, that makes
water sound like warder, writer rider, and so on. Pretty universal from
almost all regions. And it's only when in the middle of a word - t is
pronounced t at the start or end of a word, just not in the middle. And
I'm sure they (you) don't realise they're doing it. I've recently
started to wonder - out of fairness - if there's some similar
pronunciation most Brits do that we seem not to know we're doing but
that grates on US ears.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Correct me if I'm wrong ... everybody else does.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote

| They both have their irritating aspects! In this case (that "myriad"
| shouldn't take "of" [any more than "comprises"/"comprised" do]), I think
| both are the same.

I find a lot of what irritates me is in the attitude or
style. I especially dislike "ask" as a noun. It's a request.
So why "ask"? The only reason I can think of is that
maybe lazy-ass texters were trying to save 4 letters.

Another is y'all. That's a regional expression from the
South. A contraction of "you all". Fine if you happen to
be going to a hoedown on the Bayou. But suddenly it seems
to be a signal that the speaker appreciates ethnic flavor...
Even if Southern pride is the closest they can get to
ethnic.

|
| (I feel the same about Dame Julie.)
| Dame Julie? Do you perhaps mean Judy Dench? You
expect us colonists to know all the royalty, what? We
know Princess First Class Meghan, because she's the
US ambassador of New Age Frippery and Nouveau Riche.
(Having inherited the title from Lady Oprah.) We also
know Harry, because he's her too-public lap dog. Aside
from that? I do seem to remember a pleasant woman
named Kate, who's apparently famous for wearing a
large variety of tasteful get-ups, as we say in the
Colonies. (Perhaps she's the Duchess of Millinery?)

Personally I like Charles and I don't like the way
you Brits disrespect him. He's consistently decent,
responsible, and seems to genuinely devote himself to
the people. Yet the media are always looking for a
chance to make him look silly.

| One aspect of American speech that bugs me far more than it should -
| after all, it doesn't _matter_ - is the voiced embedded T, that makes
| water sound like warder, writer rider, and so on. Pretty universal from
| almost all regions. And it's only when in the middle of a word - t is
| pronounced t at the start or end of a word, just not in the middle. And
| I'm sure they (you) don't realise they're doing it.

Is that one of those British passive aggressive moves,
accusing us of doing it deliberately? :)

It's certainly common. I speak that way. I feel like I'd
need to make a full stop if I want to pronounce a T like
that. Who's got time?

There's another one I've noticed that seems new.
For some reason it bugs me. "Student". I say something
like "STEW-nt". Many young people now say "STEW-DEH".

There's also a breathy, skipped T at the end that's typical of
both Irish and New England. I never noticed that I did that until
I heard Meryl Streep's accent in the movie Doubt, which she
pronounced with a very soft T, partially touching the tongue to
the middle of the hard palate and pushing air past it, rather
than snapping the tongue near the front of the hard palate.

So, yes, I'm guilty. I don't really do Ts except in words like
"table". But I do enjoy the British art of exaggerated Ts to
produce a kind of irritably emphatic tone. It's hard to speak
so forcefully in American English. (Yet if you watch old movies
from the 30s and 40s, many of the actors had semi-aristocratic
New England accents that are quite pleasant and sort of
half British. Katherine Hepburn was a bit like that. But maybe
that was more theatrical style than accent. I don't know.)

| I've recently
| started to wonder - out of fairness - if there's some similar
| pronunciation most Brits do that we seem not to know we're doing but
| that grates on US ears.

Not in the formal accent. At least not to me. I enjoy the
care of articulation. Though I think you might come up
with some insults other than "wanker". That's badly overused.
Maybe something like "goddamn T-skipping colonist" would be
a nice change of pace. Aside from that, probably only the
excessive formality needs work. When insults are made passive
aggressively, that's not classy. It's just sleaze. I don't know
where Brits got the idea that it's classy to insult another while
trying to fool them into not noticing. It's barmy, what? In
the US we say, "Hey, shit-for-brains, you're out to lunch!"
A Brit would likely say, "Ah, well, you apparently know more
about it than I do."

On 12/19/2021 7:29 AM, Mayayana wrote:
> "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote
>
> | They both have their irritating aspects! In this case (that "myriad"
> | shouldn't take "of" [any more than "comprises"/"comprised" do]), I think
> | both are the same.
>
> I find a lot of what irritates me is in the attitude or
> style. I especially dislike "ask" as a noun. It's a request.
> So why "ask"? The only reason I can think of is that
> maybe lazy-ass texters were trying to save 4 letters.

Or maybe lazy-ask testers.

> Another is y'all. That's a regional expression from the
> South. A contraction of "you all". Fine if you happen to
> be going to a hoedown on the Bayou. But suddenly it seems
> to be a signal that the speaker appreciates ethnic flavor...
> Even if Southern pride is the closest they can get to
> ethnic.

Many languages have separate forms for second person singular and second
person plural. English used to ("thou" and "you"), but these day the
plural form ("you") is now almost always used for both singular and
plural in an effort to be polite.

Many people find the absence of separate forms troubling, so they use
"you" for the singular and some new form for the plural. What they use
for the plural varies for place to place, but "y'all," "you all" and
"youse" are all fairly common in some locations. If they say "you" to a
group of people, they fear that someone may feel left out, so they use
one of these new plural forms.

On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 08:01:30 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

> Many people find the absence of separate forms troubling, so they use
> "you" for the singular and some new form for the plural. What they use
> for the plural varies for place to place, but "y'all," "you all" and
> "youse" are all fairly common in some locations. If they say "you" to a
> group of people, they fear that someone may feel left out, so they use
> one of these new plural forms.

My late uncle from Big Spring, Texas once told me that "y'all" was
singular and "all y'all" was plural. After listening to his friends and
neighbors, I believe him.