But when we talk about organisation(and convincing sometimes not on merit sake), banner name helps. I was once in organisation where The MS/Intel/IBM combination is a sure thing because even if there is anything went wrong, it wouldn't be the reason for scrutiny comparing with say using a machine with AMD inside.
Alex Martelli wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > How about, Google use python extensively ? This I believe is a very > > strong argument for any concern about python. > > I must admit to feeling very good when I read this kind of comment (it > IS nice to see one's employer held up as a good example -- and, I WAS > hired at Google in good part based on my Python skills, and authorship > of the "Python in a Nutshell" book, which is among our standards books > for new hires). However, let me play devil's advocate: the mix of > software that Google develops, considering what we offer to the public > and some reasonable speculation about the infrastructure that must be > behind those offers, is clearly heavily slanted towards _networking_. > > So, our use cannot necessarily be "concern-allaying" for a firm which > (say) doesn't care about networking, but rather wants to program games, > or traditional business applications, or personal/group productivity > apps, or ... But fortunately there are plenty of "success stories" in > each and every one of these fields. > > For example, for games, Civilization IV is being developed mostly in > Python (with C++ for some low levels, and BoostPython as "glue"); other > Python success stories show it used in payroll applications (the hugely > successful PayThyme), productivity ones (OSAF's Chandler), etc, etc. > > Look around the web for "Python success stories" and you may find many > other examples in as huge a variety of fields as one might wish. > > > Alex -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
