realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OT] Why "Computer Science" - was Re: Packed Encoding Rules

To: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
Subject: Re: [OT] Why "Computer Science" - was Re: Packed Encoding Rules
From: Paul Rodman <paul at ilanga dot com>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:13:58 -0800
Delivered-to: listarchive at realsoftware dot com
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <mailman dot 9879 dot 1204232850 dot 9216 dot realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
From: Joe Strout <joe at inspiringapps dot com>
>
>On Feb 28, 2008, at 11:27 AM, Tim Jones wrote:
>
>>  When you take a
>>  CompSci course, you are learning the "Science" of Computers.  The
>>  premise is to provide a broad range of knowledge that can be applied
>>  to computers in general.  Granted, most modern courses should be
>>  named "Windows Science" because of their Windows-centric tilt.
>
>That's not true in my experience -- my wife is a computer science 
>professor, and in her department (as well as where she went to grad 
>school), Windows machines are rare among the staff and pretty much 
>unheard of in the courses.  The courses are about science in general, 
>but the work is generally done on Unix/Linux boxes (including Macs,
>which have become quite popular in CS departments since OS X).

....unless you're at University of Washington in Seattle (one of the 
top rated CS schools and my alma mater), where MS dumps vast 
quantities of free software and major funding. Not many Macs around 
there. I used a Mac and it was uphill all the way. I couldn't take 
some grad courses because they required intimate knowledge of, for 
example, MFC or Direct X.

Still, the theoretical part was top notch.

Paul Rodman
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>