M$ to STRIKE again...

M$ to STRIKE again...

[essoft]

A recent remark by ex-MS developer Mr.Oglesby about MS' touching concern
for our excessive lingering with the software we spent billions
purchasing, and many more billions learning, struck a sinister resonance
with this little item I might have missed otherwise...maybe the time has
come that we start NOTICING in a big way!!



"Bay Area Computer Currents", March 18-31, 1997, page 13 

Apparently, Microsoft has decided that it is time for you to burn your
bridges. Unlike previous versions of Windows 95, Windows 95 OEM Systems
Release 2 (OSR2) does not allow dual-booting between it and Windows 3.x.


--
Dr.B.Voh
Eclipse Software 
http://www.netcom.com/~essoft

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Mark Wilden]

> Apparently, Microsoft has decided that it is time for you to burn your
> bridges. Unlike previous versions of Windows 95, Windows 95 OEM Systems
> Release 2 (OSR2) does not allow dual-booting between it and Windows 3.x.

Good! 

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Nick Roberts]

Mark Wilden <Mark@mWilden.com> wrote in article
<01bc433c$e5109820$230228ce@default>...
> > Apparently, Microsoft has decided that it is time for you to burn your
> > bridges. Unlike previous versions of Windows 95, Windows 95 OEM Systems
> > Release 2 (OSR2) does not allow dual-booting between it and Windows
3.x.
> 
> Good! 


Is this "good" as in "let's hope MS have shot themselves in the foot", or
"good" as in "people who dual-boot are timewasters/fools/incompetent/*"?

Nick.


*insert your own favourite term of admonishment here
PS: spot the zeugma

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Bruce Rosner]

Nick Roberts <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> wrote in article
<01bc4776$23c72ce0$22f482c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>...
> 
> 
> Mark Wilden <Mark@mWilden.com> wrote in article
> <01bc433c$e5109820$230228ce@default>...
> > > Apparently, Microsoft has decided that it is time for you to burn
your
> > > bridges. Unlike previous versions of Windows 95, Windows 95 OEM
Systems
> > > Release 2 (OSR2) does not allow dual-booting between it and Windows
> 3.x.
> > 
> > Good! 

Microsoft has for a long time now gone after future markets rather than
past ones. While there is perhaps currently a large market for software
products and services for Windows 3.1 systems, Microsoft wisely (in my
opinion) prefers to leave it to third parties who drain their resources
fighting for larger scraps of a shrinking market. (Word Perfect, Lotus,
Novell, etc.)

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Deutscher]

Bruce Rosner (brosner@pacbell.net) wrote:


: Nick Roberts <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> wrote in article
: <01bc4776$23c72ce0$22f482c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>...
: > 
: > 
: > Mark Wilden <Mark@mWilden.com> wrote in article
: > <01bc433c$e5109820$230228ce@default>...
: > > > Apparently, Microsoft has decided that it is time for you to burn
: your
: > > > bridges. Unlike previous versions of Windows 95, Windows 95 OEM
: Systems
: > > > Release 2 (OSR2) does not allow dual-booting between it and Windows
: > 3.x.
: > > 
: > > Good! 

: Microsoft has for a long time now gone after future markets rather than
: past ones. While there is perhaps currently a large market for software
: products and services for Windows 3.1 systems, Microsoft wisely (in my
: opinion) prefers to leave it to third parties who drain their resources
: fighting for larger scraps of a shrinking market. (Word Perfect, Lotus,
: Novell, etc.)

Let me translate: Microsoft has or a long time now gone after
complete incomaptibility with it's competitiors and even its own products
in order to maximize the amount of money they can collect after every bug fix
in their 'operating system'. Microsoft wisely (IMHO) relies on blindfolded
people who think this is just great. Stefan


--
========================================================================
Stefan A. Deutscher, sad@utk.edu, (001)-423-[522-7845|974-7838|574-5897]
                                             home^    UTK^     ORNL^
========================================================================

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Tom Wheeley]

In article <3353A5E4.2FD4@sni.de> hetzer.abg@sni.de "Volker Hetzer" writes:

> > : Microsoft has for a long time now gone after future markets rather than
> > : past ones.
>
> You mean, that's why they still drag DOS with them?

I don't see MS developing or supporting DOS.  Or, for that matter, Win 3.11

-- 
:sb)

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Dave Sharp]

In article <01bc4776$23c72ce0$22f482c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>, Nick
Roberts <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> writes
>
>
>Mark Wilden <Mark@mWilden.com> wrote in article
><01bc433c$e5109820$230228ce@default>...
>> > Apparently, Microsoft has decided that it is time for you to burn your
>> > bridges. Unlike previous versions of Windows 95, Windows 95 OEM Systems
>> > Release 2 (OSR2) does not allow dual-booting between it and Windows
>3.x.
>> 
>> Good! 
>
>
>Is this "good" as in "let's hope MS have shot themselves in the foot", or
>"good" as in "people who dual-boot are timewasters/fools/incompetent/*"?
>
>Nick.
>
>
>*insert your own favourite term of admonishment here
>PS: spot the zeugma
>
>
I can't see what this thresd has to do with a prolog group but perahps
someone should point out that if you develop systems for people in the
real world you have to write for the platform they use. Some of the
people I write for insist on still using windows 3.1, for that matter
some even still want dos applications. Therefore regardless of the MS
view of the future I have to retain all previous systems. I suspect
otheres have the same problems. Even if I never wrote another new system
for win 3.1 or dos I would still have an obligation to support systems I
have written in the past. 

                        Dave Sharp
BTW perhaps the nicest thing about Prolog is that most of the
development comes from the academic community and from commercial
developers who are in sympathy with what logic programmers are trying to
do. Long may MS and the like keep their hands off it. 
-- 
Dave Sharp

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Avi Cohen Stuart]

In article <3353A5E4.2FD4@sni.de> Volker Hetzer <hetzer.abg@sni.de> writes:

   > 
   > : Microsoft has for a long time now gone after future markets rather than
   > : past ones.
   You mean, that's why they still drag DOS with them?

Yes! What else do you think NT is? 

Avi.
-- 
A. B. Cohen Stuart, M.Sc.    |Baron van Nagellstraat 89|Phone: +31 342 428229
Software Engineer            |P.O. Box 143	       |Fax  : +31 342 428787
Tools / Logic Group          |3770 AC  Barneveld       |Email: avi@baan.nl
Baan Research & Development  |The Netherlands          |Home : +31 33 4728194

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[William Frye]

34110s96@student.csi.cuny.edu wrote:
: If one of you could write a cool installation program for UNIX then UNIX
: will gain its acceptence and kill crapy NT before its birth.

: I hate installing UNIX, but it is so powerful.

Try Linux and the latest version of Xfree, these are so simple even I have
been able to install Linux(Slackware version) on several PC's.  I must
admit I have not mad a serious attemp at network installation.

Lint-like program for C++ ...

[Steve Dimig]

Hi -,

Does anyone know of a Lint like program for C++.  I was recently
involved in debugging a memory corruption problem.  After a week of
inspection and recompilations, we found the problem was in overwriting
the bounds of an array.  This type of problem would have been caught
with lint if our development language was C.  Our language, however, is
C++.

Steve Dimig
dimigs@agcs.com

Re: Lint-like program for C++ ...

[Uwe Baemayr]

Steve Dimig wrote:

> Does anyone know of a Lint like program for C++.  I was recently
> involved in debugging a memory corruption problem.  After a week of
> inspection and recompilations, we found the problem was in overwriting
> the bounds of an array.  This type of problem would have been caught
> with lint if our development language was C.  Our language, however, is
> C++.
> 
> Steve Dimig
> dimigs@agcs.com

Yes, Flexelint/PCLINT is first-rate, available for
DOS, OS/2, and UNIX. and reasonably priced.  Look at 

	www.gimpel.com

And now back to our regular COBOL discussions...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Uwe Baemayr                     | E-mail: uwe@liant.com              |
| Ryan McFarland Corporation      |     or: jeannyb@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu |
| -- a division of Liant Software | Compuserve: 74774,47  /  GO LIANT  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Lint-like program for C++ ...

[Oliver Boehm]

Steve Dimig wrote:
> 
> Hi -,
> 
> Does anyone know of a Lint like program for C++.  I was recently
> involved in debugging a memory corruption problem.  After a week of
> inspection and recompilations, we found the problem was in overwriting
> the bounds of an array.  This type of problem would have been caught
> with lint if our development language was C.  Our language, however, is
> C++.

I don't know if Lint can find the overwriting the bounds of an array
because the array is often indexed by a variable.
Tools which may help you:

	ProLint:	Lint for C/C++ (www.pts.co.uk)
	INSURE++:	lint(C/C++) + memory monitor + coverage analysis
			(www.fastcase.com)
	Purify:		memory checker
			(www.pureatria.com)

Also there are some compiler on the markets which offers also 
runtime checking (I think SPARCworks, ObjectCenter).

Oliver
------------------------------------------------v----------
Oliver Boehm	OBoehm@stgl.sel.alcatel.de	| No RISC -
            	boehm@ba-stuttgart.de    	| No FUN
------------------------------------------------^----------

Re: Lint-like program for C++ ...

[Robert Dewar]

Steve Dimig wrote:
>
> Hi -,
>
> Does anyone know of a Lint like program for C++.  I was recently
> involved in debugging a memory corruption problem.  After a week of
> inspection and recompilations, we found the problem was in overwriting
> the bounds of an array.  This type of problem would have been caught
> with lint if our development language was C.  Our language, however, is
> C++.

and Oliver Boehn replied

> I don't know if Lint can find the overwriting the bounds of an array
> because the array is often indexed by a variable.
> Tools which may help you:

The trouble with both the post and the answer is that they are fiercely
cross-posted to:

  comp.lang.fortran
  comp.lang.ada
  comp.lang.c
  comp.lang.c++
  comp.lang.cobol
  comp.lang.pascal.misc
  comp.lang.prolog
  comp.lang.basc.visual.misc
  de.comp.lang.c

and thus went to a lot of irrelevant groups. I note that this is the same
list that has been used for the irrelevant thread on Microsoft and Windows.

This kind of careless and thoughtless crossposting does a lot of damage
to the groups both directly (junk messages) and indirectly (more good
people get fed up and stop participating).

A good idea is for everyone to try to be more aware of cross-posting. If
you must follow up one of these messages, please be careful to trim off
the irrelevant newsgroups. Personally, I never reply to messages that are
inappropriately cross-posted except to note the inappropriate
cross-posting to the original author. If more people took care to do
this, then it would become counter productive to spam multiple-groups
in hopes of coaxing an answer from someone in an irrelevant group.

Of course in this particular case, maybe what the author wanted was piles
of advocacy messages for other languages?? :-)

Re: Lint-like program for C++ ...

[James Youngman]

In article <33570C43.411F@stgl.sel.alcatel.de>, OBoehm@stgl.sel.alcatel.de 
says...

>Also there are some compiler on the markets which offers also 
>runtime checking (I think SPARCworks, ObjectCenter).

Also, there is a checking version of GCC.

-- 
James Youngman       VG Gas Analysis Systems  The trouble with the rat-race 
Before sending advertising material, read     is, even if you win, you're 
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.html         still a rat.

Re: Lint-like program for C++ ...

[Chris Durand]

Steve Dimig wrote:
> 
> Hi -,
> 
> Does anyone know of a Lint like program for C++.  I was recently
> involved in debugging a memory corruption problem.  After a week of
> inspection and recompilations, we found the problem was in overwriting
> the bounds of an array.  This type of problem would have been caught
> with lint if our development language was C.  Our language, however, is
> C++.
> 
> Steve Dimig
> dimigs@agcs.com
On the PC, PC-Lint from Gimpel Software (610) 584 4261 is pretty
complete and highly configurable.

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Corey Minyard]

34110s96@student.csi.cuny.edu writes:

> 
> If one of you could write a cool installation program for UNIX then UNIX
> will gain its acceptence and kill crapy NT before its birth.
> 
> I hate installing UNIX, but it is so powerful.

You obviously haven't installed Linux recently.  I hear that many
distributions are as easy or easier than Windoze.

-- 
Corey Minyard               Internet:  minyard@acm.org
  Work: minyard@nortel.ca       UUCP:  minyard@wf-rch.cirr.com

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[S. Narasimh Reddy]

In <m2k9m15l7g.fsf@acm.org> Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org> writes: 
>

>You obviously haven't installed Linux recently.  I hear that many
>distributions are as easy or easier than Windoze.
>
Excuse my ignorance.  What is Linux (a form of unix for PCs?).  Is it
really that well supported?
SNReddy

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Da Borg]

[3 newsgroups trimmed]

S. Narasimh Reddy wrote:
> In <m2k9m15l7g.fsf@acm.org> Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org> writes:
> >You obviously haven't installed Linux recently.  I hear that many
> >distributions are as easy or easier than Windoze.
> >
> Excuse my ignorance.  What is Linux (a form of unix for PCs?).  Is it
> really that well supported?

Sure. You can d-load it freely but I doubt you want to pump
over 500MB of programs through your phone line. Better
check your local CDROM/multimedia store or order directly.
Some sites to visit:

http://www.linux.org/
http://www.redhat.com/ (<- my favourite distribution)
http://www.debian.org/
http://www.linuxnow.com/

It doesn't really recognize some "Plug&Pray" crap by default
so choose hardware wisely. Runs on anything from Amigas and
386SX with 2MB of RAM to Dec Alphas, SparkStations and
PPro's. Full source code, SysV/BSD extensions, tons of
development-related software.

BTW, I also like NetBSD, check http://www.netbsd.org/. Not
as easy to use and setup but NFS is slightly faster than
Linux, also, it is most widely ported OS in existance and
free as well.

-- 
When sending private email, please remove underscores in "vladi_mip".
#include <disclaimer.h>  |     *Good pings come in small packets*
vladimip AT uniserve.com |  Ceterum censeo Microsoftam delendam esse
Vancouver, B.C.          | SIGSIG -- signature too long (core dumped)

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Jay Lyerly]

Da Borg wrote:
> 
> [3 newsgroups trimmed]
> 
> S. Narasimh Reddy wrote:
> > In <m2k9m15l7g.fsf@acm.org> Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org> writes:
> > >You obviously haven't installed Linux recently.  I hear that many
> > >distributions are as easy or easier than Windoze.
> > >
> > Excuse my ignorance.  What is Linux (a form of unix for PCs?).  Is it
> > really that well supported?
> 
> Sure. You can d-load it freely but I doubt you want to pump
> over 500MB of programs through your phone line. Better
> check your local CDROM/multimedia store or order directly.
> Some sites to visit:
> 
> http://www.linux.org/
> http://www.redhat.com/ (<- my favourite distribution)
> http://www.debian.org/
> http://www.linuxnow.com/
> 
> It doesn't really recognize some "Plug&Pray" crap by default
> so choose hardware wisely. Runs on anything from Amigas and
> 386SX with 2MB of RAM to Dec Alphas, SparkStations and
> PPro's. Full source code, SysV/BSD extensions, tons of
> development-related software.
> 
> BTW, I also like NetBSD, check http://www.netbsd.org/. Not
> as easy to use and setup but NFS is slightly faster than
> Linux, also, it is most widely ported OS in existance and
> free as well.
> 
> --
> When sending private email, please remove underscores in "vladi_mip".
> #include <disclaimer.h>  |     *Good pings come in small packets*
> vladimip AT uniserve.com |  Ceterum censeo Microsoftam delendam esse
> Vancouver, B.C.          | SIGSIG -- signature too long (core dumped)


http://www.cheapbytes.com is a good source for cheap linux CD's.  They
also have linux and unix reference manuals and motif.

jay 

wjlyerly@unity.ncsu.edu

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Emilio Lopes]

Da Borg (vla_di_mip@uniserve.com) wrote:
: Sure. You can d-load it freely but I doubt you want to pump
: over 500MB of programs through your phone line. Better
: check your local CDROM/multimedia store or order directly.
: Some sites to visit:
: 
: http://www.linux.org/
: http://www.redhat.com/ (<- my favourite distribution)
: http://www.debian.org/
: http://www.linuxnow.com/
: 
: It doesn't really recognize some "Plug&Pray" crap by default
: so choose hardware wisely. Runs on anything from Amigas and
: 386SX with 2MB of RAM to Dec Alphas, SparkStations and
: PPro's. Full source code, SysV/BSD extensions, tons of
: development-related software.

It runs also in a Sparc-based Fujitsu Super-Computer!


-- 
 Emilio C. Lopes <mailto:Emilio.Lopes@Physik.TU-Muenchen.DE>

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[M A]

Will L Unix (X Windows) ever become the main stream like Windows.  If
this god damn thing is free how come nobody supports it.   

Emilio Lopes wrote:
> 
> Da Borg (vla_di_mip@uniserve.com) wrote:
> : Sure. You can d-load it freely but I doubt you want to pump
> : over 500MB of programs through your phone line. Better
> : check your local CDROM/multimedia store or order directly.
> : Some sites to visit:
> :
> : http://www.linux.org/
> : http://www.redhat.com/ (<- my favourite distribution)
> : http://www.debian.org/
> : http://www.linuxnow.com/
> :
> : It doesn't really recognize some "Plug&Pray" crap by default
> : so choose hardware wisely. Runs on anything from Amigas and
> : 386SX with 2MB of RAM to Dec Alphas, SparkStations and
> : PPro's. Full source code, SysV/BSD extensions, tons of
> : development-related software.
> 
> It runs also in a Sparc-based Fujitsu Super-Computer!
> 
> --
>  Emilio C. Lopes <mailto:Emilio.Lopes@Physik.TU-Muenchen.DE>

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Jose Miguel Perez]

Well, there is no big company behind Linux, but if you know
where to ask you can find lots of support, and I mean a really good
one. (Most of these guys are hackers -in the good sense- that
one way or another get to solve the problem)

I don't think however Linux will be a main stream system like 
Windows. I think it will be a waste of time to have a home
computer, say,  with Linux. But for a cheap workstation may be a
good choice.

It's a pity big companies are not producing software for Linux.
(there are exceptions, of course, like Netscape and others).
This might change though as Java gets better (I mean, with the awt
and jni you can create  internet ready gui interfaces independently
-more or less- of the platform. You can write the core of your
programs in whatever language you like -provided c wrappers-).
 


On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, M A wrote:

> Will L Unix (X Windows) ever become the main stream like Windows.  If
> this god damn thing is free how come nobody supports it.   
> 
> Emilio Lopes wrote:
> > 
> > Da Borg (vla_di_mip@uniserve.com) wrote:
> > : Sure. You can d-load it freely but I doubt you want to pump
> > : over 500MB of programs through your phone line. Better
> > : check your local CDROM/multimedia store or order directly.
> > : Some sites to visit:
> > :
> > : http://www.linux.org/
> > : http://www.redhat.com/ (<- my favourite distribution)
> > : http://www.debian.org/
> > : http://www.linuxnow.com/
> > :
> > : It doesn't really recognize some "Plug&Pray" crap by default
> > : so choose hardware wisely. Runs on anything from Amigas and
> > : 386SX with 2MB of RAM to Dec Alphas, SparkStations and
> > : PPro's. Full source code, SysV/BSD extensions, tons of
> > : development-related software.
> > 
> > It runs also in a Sparc-based Fujitsu Super-Computer!
> > 
> > --
> >  Emilio C. Lopes <mailto:Emilio.Lopes@Physik.TU-Muenchen.DE>
> 
> 

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Da Borg]

M A wrote:
> 
> Will L Unix (X Windows) ever become the main stream like Windows.  If

No, I don't want it to become mainstream. Being mainstream
kills the spirit and originality. After all, Linux is for
IQ's higher than 95. :)

> this god damn thing is free how come nobody supports it.

What do you mean by "supported"? Technical support or what?

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Robert Dewar]

I am going to risk one more message in this thread in the probably hopeless
attempt to get people to notice that this thread was misposted in the first
place (perhaps the original post was a deliberate troll -- it had that
flavor -- if so, it has succeeded :-(

This thread is cross posted to:

  comp.lang.fortran
  comp.lang.ada
  comp.lang.c
  comp.lang.c++
  comp.lang.cobol
  comp.lang.pascal.misc
  comp.lang.prolog
  comp.lang.basc.visual.misc
  de.comp.lang.c

but it is irrelevant to all of them. If you want to continue the thread
it should be done in NT advocacy or Linux advocacy.

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Paul Oldham]

On Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:21:03 -0700, M A
<34110s96@student.csi.cuny.edu> growled:

>Will L Unix (X Windows) ever become the main stream like Windows.  If
>this god damn thing is free how come nobody supports it.   

Lots of people support it. You can even buy commercial support.
However if you mean no Cobol compilers then I guess it's that they're
different markets. Linux's big "markets" are home users and in
businesses network services: servers, especially web servers,
firewalls and the like.


--
Paul Oldham, Milton, Cambridge, UK
http://www.the-hug.demon.co.uk/paul/
To email me take the "x" off the *reply-to* address

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[C.Pitz]

Look at http://www.acucobol.com/Products/ACUCOBOL-85/ACU85-portlist.txt
and you will see that AcuCobol-85 is available for Linux.

Carsten Pitz

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Alexander Lehmann]

> In <m2k9m15l7g.fsf@acm.org> Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org> writes:
> >
>
> >You obviously haven't installed Linux recently.  I hear that many
> >distributions are as easy or easier than Windoze.
> >
> Excuse my ignorance.  What is Linux (a form of unix for PCs?).  Is it
> really that well supported?
> SNReddy

BETTER THAN WINDOWS!

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[kwm]

Alexander Lehmann wrote:
> 
> > In <m2k9m15l7g.fsf@acm.org> Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org> writes:
> > >
> >
> > >You obviously haven't installed Linux recently.  I hear that many
> > >distributions are as easy or easier than Windoze.
> > >
> > Excuse my ignorance.  What is Linux (a form of unix for PCs?).  Is it
> > really that well supported?
> > SNReddy
> 
> BETTER THAN WINDOWS!

Heheheh... that is, assuming that Windows is actually "supported"?
Does anyone actually get any useful technical support from Microsoft?
From what I've heard, their "support" is 'technically correct' but
totally useless! <grin>

OTOH, technical support for Linux isn't bound by the walls of any
one corporation... rather, the support is global, and for the most
part, fast and accurate!

Linux was born and raised on the Internet. The support comes from
"home".

-- 
Kenneth W. Melvin
email: kwmelvin@nr.infi.net
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/8823/index.html
LinuX IS user friendly. It's just choosey about who its friends are.

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Kim Robert Blix]

Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org> once said:

>You obviously haven't installed Linux recently.  I hear that many
>distributions are as easy or easier than Windoze.

Except when the kernels provided on the distribution media dont recognise your
cdrom, soundcard or disks. Thats when the fun begins. ;)


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Kim Robert Blix  ( kblix@sn.no  &  http://home.sn.no/~kblix )
  
 "How do you shoot the devil in the back?"
 "What if you miss?" -Verbal Kint
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Re: Best way to kill Microsoft (Re: M$ to STRIKE again...)

[Corey Minyard]

snreddy@ix.netcom.com(S. Narasimh Reddy) writes:
> 
> In <m2k9m15l7g.fsf@acm.org> Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org> writes: 
> >
> 
> >You obviously haven't installed Linux recently.  I hear that many
> >distributions are as easy or easier than Windoze.
> >
> Excuse my ignorance.  What is Linux (a form of unix for PCs?).  Is it
> really that well supported?
> SNReddy

Wow, I thought everyone had heard of Linux.  Yes, it is a free
industrial strength *nix clone for PCs, Alpha, PowerPCs, Sparcs, etc.
I use it daily at home and at work on my PowerMac.  You can go to
http://www.redhat/com to learn more.  You can probably go to your
local computer store, book store, or CDROM store and get an install
CDROM pretty cheap.

-- 
Corey Minyard               Internet:  minyard@acm.org
  Work: minyard@nortel.ca       UUCP:  minyard@wf-rch.cirr.com

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Steve Lionel]

In article <33489A15.453C@ix.netcom.com>, essoft@ix.netcom.com writes:

|>"Bay Area Computer Currents", March 18-31, 1997, page 13 
|>
|>Apparently, Microsoft has decided that it is time for you to burn your
|>bridges. Unlike previous versions of Windows 95, Windows 95 OEM Systems
|>Release 2 (OSR2) does not allow dual-booting between it and Windows 3.x.

Um, given that OSR2 is supported only when installed on a new system,
and not as an upgrade, I don't quite understand the wailing and gnashing of
teeth about this.  Who knows what the situation will be when the
generally available "Windows 97" (or whatever it's called) arrives?   There's
also non-MS solutions such as Boot Commander, which as far as I know, should
work just fine.  I agree that MS doesn't really have an incentive to go out
of its way to maintain dual-boot compatibility with Windows 3.1, but I
don't view this as evidence of evil incarnate.
-- 

Steve Lionel                      mailto:lionel@quark.zko.dec.com
Fortran Development               http://www.digital.com/info/slionel.html
Digital Equipment Corporation     
110 Spit Brook Road, ZKO2-3/N30    
Nashua, NH 03062-2698             "Free advice is worth every cent"

For information on DIGITAL Fortran, see http://www.digital.com/fortran

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Catherine Rees Lay]

In article <3348FC2E.A8B@csolve.net>, Mike Monett <add@csolve.net>
writes
>We erased WIN95 a year ago and moved everything back to DOS. For each 
>function we now do in DOS, we gain at least 10X improvement in throughput 
>and productivity. This is the promise that MicroSoft has been making all 
>along, but you have to know how to apply the appropriate filter.
>
>There is a wealth of DOS available on the web for anyone who cares to 
>look. In fact, there is a lot of innovative and useful stuff for DOS that 
>is simply not available in Windows. 
>
>If you subscribe to the SimTel mailing list, it is astonishing how much 
>programming effort goes into "advanced" screensavers and personal address 
>books. How many more of these "advanced" programs do we need?
>
>The thing that frightens me most about Windows is looking in the Borland 
>Delphi Bugs List and checking these newsgroups. It is amazing to see the 
>workaraounds people have to use to solve problems they run into. If this 
>is an example of professional programming and how to write solid code, 
>then DOS is the future for us. It is still supported by IBM and Caldera.
>
>Anyway, with email, who needs a 50 megabyte word processor anymore?
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Michael R. Monett
>CEO
>Analog & Digital Design
>PO Box 460
>Victoria Harbor
>Ontario Canada L0K 2A0
>mailto:add@csolve.net

Win95 is not as solid as DOS, it's true. However, it is a LOT better
than Windows 3.1. Not switching from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95 because
of the bad things you have heard about 95 is a big mistake. Not
switching from DOS, on the other hand, I can understand, though you may
find new commercial software harder and harder to come by - most people
won't buy DOS-based software any more, so most companies no longer
target it.

Don't be too hard on Delphi, btw - just because Borland are prepared to
acknowledge their bugs doesn't mean they have any more than other
companies/products. The existence of a well-defined bugs list is a plus,
not a minus. 

Catherine.
-- 
Catherine Rees Lay

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[James Giles]

Catherine Rees Lay wrote:

[...]

> Don't be too hard on Delphi, btw - just because Borland are prepared to
> acknowledge their bugs doesn't mean they have any more than other
> companies/products. The existence of a well-defined bugs list is a plus,
> not a minus.

It used to be (in the good old days) that all computer vendors (software
or hardware) were very up-front about errors.  They would bend over
backwards trying to educate users about the present buglist and the
status of the respective fixes.  The problem in those days was
complacent users who couldn't be bothered to look through the known bugs
until they got bitten.

These days (especially after the Intel floating-point fiasco) vendors
seem to be shy about even admitting to having bugs.  I suspect it's
really due to a perceived changed among company marketing strategists of
the expertise of the user community.  In the old days, users were only
the elite professional type and would not have stood for stone-walling
from the vendors.  Now, most users are naive newcomers that might shy
away from any company with admitted bugs - and who can be bullied into
thinking any problems encountered are their own fault.  (Note: I'm not
saying that this is so.  I just think that's the opinion among the
vendors.)  So, most companies believe it's now in their interest to
conceal errors if possible.

-- 
J. Giles
Ricercar Software

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Michael Dodas]

.James Giles wrote:
.> 
.> Catherine Rees Lay wrote:
.> 
.> [...]
.> 
.> > Don't be too hard on Delphi, btw - just because Borland are
prepared .to
.> > acknowledge their bugs doesn't mean they have any more than other
.> > companies/products. The existence of a well-defined bugs list is a
.plus,
.> > not a minus.
.> 
.> It used to be (in the good old days) that all computer vendors
.(software
.> or hardware) were very up-front about errors.  They would bend over
.> backwards trying to educate users about the present buglist and the
.> status of the respective fixes.  The problem in those days was
.> complacent users who couldn't be bothered to look through the known
.bugs
.> until they got bitten.
.> 
.> These days (especially after the Intel floating-point fiasco) vendors
.> seem to be shy about even admitting to having bugs.  I suspect it's
.> really due to a perceived changed among company marketing strategists
.of
.> the expertise of the user community.  In the old days, users were
only
.> the elite professional type and would not have stood for
stone-walling
.> from the vendors.  Now, most users are naive newcomers that might shy
.> away from any company with admitted bugs - and who can be bullied
into
.> thinking any problems encountered are their own fault.  (Note: I'm
not
.> saying that this is so.  I just think that's the opinion among the
.> vendors.)  So, most companies believe it's now in their interest to
.> conceal errors if possible.
.> 
.> --
.> J. Giles
.> Ricercar Software


I agree completely with you, James.  The bugs, errors and problems that
are distributed with many of the PC software products are totally
unacceptable.  The two major reasons I see this happening is (1) to get
that next release out, not matter what, because the competition has it
and (2) more time is spent making the GUI look nice (dancing ICONS,
etc.) at the expense of the internal processes.  If you feel like that
you, as the customer, are being used as a guinea pig by your software
provider because of all of the problems, you probably are.  A lot of
people accept this.  A lot of people also take it for face value that a
software product is good just because it has company XYZ's name on it.

I don't agree with Caterine when she stated that "just because Borland
is prepared to acknowledge their bugs doesn't mean they have any more
than other companies/products".  All software is not created equally and
all software does not have as many bugs as everyone else's.  I'm not
singling out Borland on this issue--just generalizing this problem as a
whole.

If software vendors distributed mainframe software with the problems
that much of the PC vendors have, they would go out of business.  The
mainframe environments have never tolerated software with problems like
that.  Yes, mainframe software can have some problems.  But never to the
extent of what I've seen on other platforms.  Large, commercial
environment cannot afford those problems and down-time.

There are good PC software products if you take the time to find them. 
The PC tools I use for software development have proven to be very
reliable. But, just like mainframe software, I scrutinize PC software
just as much.  And, I have never been shy telling a vendor (mainframe or
PC) what I think.  Too many people forget that its YOUR dime and THEY
want it.  I do not have the time to continuously fight the same old
problems over and over.  And I've seen the same problems over and over,
from release-to-release, pop up in software.  How much of this are you
willing to accept before it causes you problems with your projects and
how your company runs?  Is the hype from software vendors worth the
gamble and your time?

Mike Dodas

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Robert Dewar]

I am posting this because so many people fail to watch followup groups, so
please excuse YET another junk message in this thread.

This thread is fiercely cross-posted to:

Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.
cobol,comp.lang.pascal.misc,comp.lang.prolog,comp.lang.basc.visual.misc,de.comp.
lang.c


The discussion of MS strategy and Win 95 is completely irrelevant
to the majority (operhaps ALL) of these groups. Please severely trim
the followup list if you want to reply to this thread.

Thanks.

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[essoft]

Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> The discussion of MS strategy and Win 95 is completely irrelevant
> to the majority (operhaps ALL) of these groups.


Really!? Don't they use Win3.x based sw that could be affected by this
move?

Re: M$ to STRIKE again...

[Peter Seebach]

In article <334992BB.66C6@ix.netcom.com>,  <essoft@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Robert Dewar wrote:
>> The discussion of MS strategy and Win 95 is completely irrelevant
>> to the majority (operhaps ALL) of these groups.

[For once, I'm not arguing with him, either...]

>Really!? Don't they use Win3.x based sw that could be affected by this
>move?

Well, I can tell you that I personally use *NO* win 3.x based software.  I'm
using AmigaDOS, MacOS, '95, and a few flavors of Unix, but I do not own or use
any software based on windows 3.1.

Furthermore, even if every person in these groups used windows 3.1, *IT WOULD
STILL NOT BE RELEVANT*.

I'm reading this in comp.lang.c.  I expect articles posted to this newsgroup
to be about C.  Not about some specific system, or politics, or anything else.

What software I use is irrelevant.  I am using C, mostly indpendant of my
target platforms.

It may come as a shock to some people that I post and read this much news and
still have time, but I have sex sometimes.  I eat at least once a day on the
average.  I sleep.  I have a cat.

This does *NOT* mean that discussions of sex, food, beds, or cats is topical
here.

The original message was insultingly stupid and had no place in any of the
groups listed that I've ever read.  I would like the people who consider it
relevant to go away.

-s
-- 
Copyright 1997 Peter Seebach - seebs at solon.com - C/Unix Wizard
I am not actually gladys@nancynet.com but junk mail is accepted there.
The *other* C FAQ, the hacker FAQ, et al.  http://www.solon.com/~seebs
Unsolicited email (junk mail and ads) is unwelcome, and will be billed for.