Microsoft takes on ACT

Microsoft takes on ACT

[Ted Dennison]

I'm curious what, if any, response ACT has to Microsoft's recent
efforts to convince the DoD to ban Free Software. (see
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60050-2002May22.html ).
Seeing as ACT's supported products would qualify, this would seem to
be a direct attack on their business (or at least some of it, I have
no clue what % of ACT customers are DoD and contractors, but I
understand its >0).

This is fairly big news, and I'm interested in what the ACT folks
around here think of it, given that they seem to be on the "bad end"
of Microsoft's guns on this one.

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Marin David Condic]

I like how they cite that it is more secure and less expensive. (Obviously -
if there are a million eyes scanning over the code, its a lot harder to
sneak in a back door. Do you trust Micro$oft not to do that? :-)

In a sense, the DoD has been in the "Open Source" business from early on. I
couldn't tell you how many projects it would cover, but I know that *some*
(at least one, possibly all) projects had the DoD retaining all data rights
to the software developed for a given project. Hence, so long as it was not
classified, one could file a Freedom of Information Act on it and get the
source. It was something often done by competitors in the DoD contracting
game. (Don't know how widespread that was though...)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message
news:4519e058.0205230724.38617c60@posting.google.com...
> I'm curious what, if any, response ACT has to Microsoft's recent
> efforts to convince the DoD to ban Free Software. (see
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60050-2002May22.html ).
> Seeing as ACT's supported products would qualify, this would seem to
> be a direct attack on their business (or at least some of it, I have
> no clue what % of ACT customers are DoD and contractors, but I
> understand its >0).
>
> This is fairly big news, and I'm interested in what the ACT folks
> around here think of it, given that they seem to be on the "bad end"
> of Microsoft's guns on this one.

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Ted Dennison]

Marin David Condic wrote:

> In a sense, the DoD has been in the "Open Source" business from early on. I
> couldn't tell you how many projects it would cover, but I know that *some*
> (at least one, possibly all) projects had the DoD retaining all data rights
> to the software developed for a given project. Hence, so long as it was not

That's been my experience too. I think that's what *all* users would 
demand, given they had enough clout to do it. The DoD just happens to 
have the clout. :-)

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Marin David Condic]

Any user can have the full rights to any software they want. All it takes is
a willingness to write up a cost-plus contract. :-) I don't know if the DoD
gets full data rights - clout or not - for things they buy off the shelf.
(Do you think they've got the source for Micro$oft Word? Would they really
want it? :-) But usually, if they're paying the freight to get the software
developed, they're going to own it when its done. You and I can do the
same - just get out the checkbook. :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message
news:3CEE40A9.4010500@telepath.com...
>
> That's been my experience too. I think that's what *all* users would
> demand, given they had enough clout to do it. The DoD just happens to
> have the clout. :-)
>

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Ted Dennison]

Marin David Condic wrote:

> Any user can have the full rights to any software they want. All it takes is
> a willingness to write up a cost-plus contract. :-) I don't know if the DoD
> gets full data rights - clout or not - for things they buy off the shelf.


No they don't. That's one of the contaversies about their going to COTS 
software. (At least it was 5 years ago when I last went through this).

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Marin David Condic]

I know they didn't always get full data rights to everything in some of the
contexts in which I dealt with the DoD - but that might depend on what one
means by "full data rights". Usually they got access to source code - even
COTS - if it went into the deliverable end product. They would usually "own"
what we developed for them while not owning, say, the compiler's RTK. But
remember, this was "embedded" work. I'd imagine if you built a system that
ran on top of Unix or Windows, they wouldn't expect to get the source to
those OS's. (Come to think of it, we did support systems like that for them
from time to time & I don't recall that the OS was much of an issue in the
contracts.)

But does DoD want or need the source to Microsoft Word for all the clerks &
secretaries that are typing memos in the Pentagon? Probably not any moreso
than General Motors. There might be advantages to Open Source stuff in this
area (price, portability of the data, etc.) but it isn't obvious that the
advantages make Open Source the hands-down winner.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message
news:3CEF9F06.2050109@telepath.com...
> Marin David Condic wrote:
>
> > Any user can have the full rights to any software they want. All it
takes is
> > a willingness to write up a cost-plus contract. :-) I don't know if the
DoD
> > gets full data rights - clout or not - for things they buy off the
shelf.
>
>
> No they don't. That's one of the contaversies about their going to COTS
> software. (At least it was 5 years ago when I last went through this).
>
>
>
>

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Wes Groleau]

> if there are a million eyes scanning over the code, its a lot harder to
> sneak in a back door. Do you trust Micro$oft not to do that? :-)

They've already been caught doing that at least once.

-- 
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Jeffrey Carter]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> 
> I like how they cite that it is more secure and less expensive. (Obviously -
> if there are a million eyes scanning over the code, its a lot harder to
> sneak in a back door. Do you trust Micro$oft not to do that? :-)

Indeed, Mitre Corp. prepared a report for the DoD in May recommending
open source rather than proprietary S/W.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60050-2002May22.html

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Go and boil your bottoms."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Wes Groleau]

> I'm curious what, if any, response ACT has to Microsoft's recent
> efforts to convince the DoD to ban Free Software. (see

I'm interested in ACT's reaction also.

Putting this one along with MANY other Microsoft actions
recently, my reaction is that Microsoft must be in big trouble
to be so panicky lately about Open Source.

-- 
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[tmoran]

> my reaction is that Microsoft must be in big trouble
> to be so panicky lately about Open Source.
  "Poor MS, far from being a monopoly, is fighting for its life against
the flood of Open Source software, judge."  Right. ;)

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Marin David Condic]

Ahhhhh, but this fits nicely with the theory of Free Markets. (In theory at
least) In a totally free market, nobody could maintain a monopoly on
anything forever. This is because there are always substitutes and sooner or
later an alternate supplier will emerge. (Of course, sooner or later, we'll
all be dead, too. :-)

Of course, this doesn't mean Micro$oft is not a monopoly - just a business
that if they are a monopoly, they are about to become part of an Oligopoly -
or maybe just another player among many. Why else would they be so scared of
Open Source? Its allowing smaller players to emerge and chip away at their
market.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


<tmoran@acm.org> wrote in message
news:UyaH8.111$BO4.28598537@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> > my reaction is that Microsoft must be in big trouble
> > to be so panicky lately about Open Source.
>   "Poor MS, far from being a monopoly, is fighting for its life against
> the flood of Open Source software, judge."  Right. ;)

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Preben Randhol]

On Thu, 23 May 2002 17:21:56 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote:
> Ahhhhh, but this fits nicely with the theory of Free Markets. (In theory at
> least) In a totally free market, nobody could maintain a monopoly on
> anything forever. This is because there are always substitutes and sooner or
> later an alternate supplier will emerge. (Of course, sooner or later, we'll
> all be dead, too. :-)

What is a totally free market? Looking at the "Free" Markets today one
see that companies gets bigger and bigger and fewer and fewer. I think
ideal theory cannot be applied to the current market. The reason why for
instance Linux does well is that it is outside the market. If Linux had
been a company, Microsoft would have bought it and dismantled it in
order to keep its place. Now they try by spreading FUD.

Read:

 GNU.org.pe: Peruvian Congressman's Open Letter to Microsoft
 http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-05-06-012-26-OS-SM-LL

The Free Market revolves around the survival of the fittest which means
you will always get large companies dominating and smaller companies
trying to grow up to overturn the "leader". The problem is that the
bigger companies won't play fair. The advantage smaller comanies may
have is that they can be more dynamic. Another problem is the cost
barrier to get into a market which may be extremely high.

Preben

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Marin David Condic]

"Preben Randhol" <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaesi0h.49v.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no...
>
> What is a totally free market? Looking at the "Free" Markets today one

There is no such thing as a "totally free market" and I doubt there ever has
been. There are always some parts of any economy that are what is called
"command economy". (Police protection, fire protection, public libraries,
etc. are all examples of "command" aspects of the economy.)


> see that companies gets bigger and bigger and fewer and fewer. I think

Not at all true. Actually, quite the opposite. "Free" markets are for the
most part driven by small businesses. Generally, the less they tend towards
"Command" economies, the easier it is for small businesses to start up, gain
a toe hold and  become successful. The more an economy tends towards a
"Command" economy, the more it tends to breed large, inefficient,
politically driven and unaccountable organizations to deliver goods and
services.


> ideal theory cannot be applied to the current market. The reason why for
> instance Linux does well is that it is outside the market. If Linux had

How is Linux outside the market? "The Market" is just a word for the means
of distributing economic goods. How is Linux not an economic good? How is it
not distributed? And just because someone doesn't get paid for the
distribution of the razor doesn't mean they aren't going to get paid for the
distribution of the blades. Linux is very much a part of "The Market" and it
isn't "Free" (beer) - *someone* pays.


> been a company, Microsoft would have bought it and dismantled it in
> order to keep its place. Now they try by spreading FUD.
>
You may be right if Linux had been a closed source, proprietary thing.
However, Linux *could* have been a company and *still* been in a position to
threaten Microsoft. ACT is a company and they build GNAT for fun and profit,
yet it is still open source and of some potential threat to Microsoft.


> Read:
>
>  GNU.org.pe: Peruvian Congressman's Open Letter to Microsoft
>  http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-05-06-012-26-OS-SM-LL
>
> The Free Market revolves around the survival of the fittest which means
> you will always get large companies dominating and smaller companies

Not at all true. Sure, there is a tendency for successful companies to get
more successful, but there is also a tendency for large companies to get
"too large" for their own good & they are easily beaten by smaller, more
agile companies. History is repleat with examples. IBM? Where did Compaq,
Dell and Gateway get the idea they could ever kick IBM's butt when they were
just little guys starting out in garages?


> trying to grow up to overturn the "leader". The problem is that the
> bigger companies won't play fair. The advantage smaller comanies may

Where does it say on the admission ticket that existence is "fair"? :-)

> have is that they can be more dynamic. Another problem is the cost
> barrier to get into a market which may be extremely high.
>
There are really big barriers to entry and exit in lots of businesses. Power
generation, automobile manufacture, shipbuilding, etc. *Software* is not one
of them. All you need is a PC, a compiler and an Internet connection. Why is
Microsoft in trouble? Because the barriers to entry are low and other
players are emerging with products that compete nicely with theirs and they
can't come up with something new & fascinating to capture hoards of new
customers.

Markets work. I'm not against some regulation by government to make sure
that companies don't do bad things - like pollute Lake Erie or lie to their
investors. However, you really have a kind of a line on which to choose from
as to how you want to distribute goods and services:

{Totally-Free-Market}.........................................{Total Command
Economy}

You have to pick where on that line you want to fall. Hint: The closer
people have come to the right-hand-side, the more they have generated
poverty, oppression and failure. :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com

OT: Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[tmoran]

> Markets work.
Consideration of the economic characteristics of software production,
and observation of the recent history of information and communication
companies does tend to test one's faith.  But all will surely be
resolved by Judgement Day.
Doubting Thomas

Re: Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Marin David Condic]

While I'll be the last one to defend Capitalism as always being fair,
equitable, ethical or saintly, my observation is this: Capitalism may be a
lousy system and full of all sorts of flaws & abuses, but so far I've not
heard anyone outline or implement a system that didn't end up worse.
Capitalism isn't even a "system" in the sense that nobody sat down in an
ivory tower one day and dreampt it up and wrote a manifesto describing it
and how everyone should implement it by law. Capitalism is just what people
do when you leave them alone. Human freedom in action - complete with the
human freedom to do wrong.

Maybe we ought to find a way to get this back on topic. :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


<tmoran@acm.org> wrote in message
news:CAFH8.367$JA7.67654820@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> > Markets work.
> Consideration of the economic characteristics of software production,
> and observation of the recent history of information and communication
> companies does tend to test one's faith.  But all will surely be
> resolved by Judgement Day.
> Doubting Thomas

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Preben Randhol]

On Fri, 24 May 2002 10:31:01 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote:
>>
>> What is a totally free market? Looking at the "Free" Markets today one
> 
> There is no such thing as a "totally free market" and I doubt there ever has
> been. There are always some parts of any economy that are what is called
> "command economy". (Police protection, fire protection, public libraries,
> etc. are all examples of "command" aspects of the economy.)

What has this to do with the "market" being free or not. You can also
add: Schools, army, hospitals etc... It depends in which country you
are. American hospitals are private (at least most) but as I recall they
are not at all cost effiecient compared to hospitals in other countries
where this service is in the "command economy" sector.

>> see that companies gets bigger and bigger and fewer and fewer. I think
> 
> Not at all true. Actually, quite the opposite. "Free" markets are for the
> most part driven by small businesses. Generally, the less they tend towards
> "Command" economies, the easier it is for small businesses to start up, gain
> a toe hold and  become successful. The more an economy tends towards a
> "Command" economy, the more it tends to breed large, inefficient,
> politically driven and unaccountable organizations to deliver goods and
> services.

Ok you are discussion something else. I have not said anywhere that one
shouldn't have a free market I was just commenting on some of its flaws.
But it is quite typical that if one do this one gets stamped as being on
the other side. I don't understand why.

>> been a company, Microsoft would have bought it and dismantled it in
>> order to keep its place. Now they try by spreading FUD.
>>
> You may be right if Linux had been a closed source, proprietary thing.
> However, Linux *could* have been a company and *still* been in a position to
> threaten Microsoft. ACT is a company and they build GNAT for fun and profit,
> yet it is still open source and of some potential threat to Microsoft.

Look at the history of f.ex M$ and you will see that they have bought a
lot of companies to keep its position. You can start with Corel. 
>>
>> The Free Market revolves around the survival of the fittest which means
>> you will always get large companies dominating and smaller companies
> 
> Not at all true. Sure, there is a tendency for successful companies to get
> more successful, but there is also a tendency for large companies to get
> "too large" for their own good & they are easily beaten by smaller, more
> agile companies. History is repleat with examples. IBM? Where did Compaq,
> Dell and Gateway get the idea they could ever kick IBM's butt when they were
> just little guys starting out in garages?

But this is survival of the fittest. The bigger companies gets bigger
and bigger and then they may fall over if/when they get too static.

>> trying to grow up to overturn the "leader". The problem is that the
>> bigger companies won't play fair. The advantage smaller comanies may
> 
> Where does it say on the admission ticket that existence is "fair"? :-)

It is the foundation of Free market.

> Markets work. I'm not against some regulation by government to make sure
> that companies don't do bad things - like pollute Lake Erie or lie to their
> investors. However, you really have a kind of a line on which to choose from
> as to how you want to distribute goods and services:
> 
> {Totally-Free-Market}.........................................{Total Command
> Economy}
> 
> You have to pick where on that line you want to fall. Hint: The closer
> people have come to the right-hand-side, the more they have generated
> poverty, oppression and failure. :-)

Actually that is not true at all. The closer you get to either side of
your line the more poverty and class distinction you will find. I
visited Denver for a conference and in one week I was begged for money
more times than in other west European country. 

No I believe more in a balanced point somewhere on this line.

Preben

OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Frank J. Lhota]

All of this reminds me of the economic bestseller "The New Industrial
State", written by the renowned Harvard professor and former presidential
advisor, John Kenneth Galbraith. In this highly influential book, Galbraith
states that

"The riskiness of modern corporate life is in fact the harmless conceit of
the modern corporate executive ... no large United States corporation, which
is also large in its industry, has failed or been seriously in danger of
insolvency in many years. [General Motors] is large enough to control its
markets "

The idea that leading corporations are invincible seems quite in tune with a
lot of current economic thought. In spite of this, the book is now a bit
embarrassing; it is now quoted more by Galbraith's opponents than by his
defenders. The problem with "The New Industrial State" is that it was
written in 1967, and since then many of the book's examples of companies
that were unbeatable has taken a beating. Contrary to the book's contention,
we have seen major retailers go bankrupt: we may soon see K-Mart join the
ranks of Montgomery Ward, Grants, Gimbels , and Child World. GM has lost
control of its market. Galbraith does write about a retailer whose dominance
cannot be challenged, but it was not Wal-Mart. And in the area of computers,
this tome treats the very idea that some guys working out of a garage could
threaten IBM's dominance with great derision.

In short, the notion that Microsoft is impervious to challengers from
smaller companies (are there any other kind) should be taken with a grain of
salt. Microsoft once played the role of David against IBM's Goliath; now
that Microsoft is in the role of Goliath, it would take just one company
with the next great new idea to bring MS to its knees.

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Preben Randhol]

On Fri, 24 May 2002 18:45:18 GMT, Frank J. Lhota wrote:
> 
> In short, the notion that Microsoft is impervious to challengers from
> smaller companies (are there any other kind) should be taken with a grain of
> salt. Microsoft once played the role of David against IBM's Goliath; now
> that Microsoft is in the role of Goliath, it would take just one company
> with the next great new idea to bring MS to its knees.

Yes, but then you need goverments that take action when the free market
doesn't work because the biggest companies uses illegal methods to keep
their position. You do not need goverments who looks the other way and
says "ok, but next time try to keep it secret".

The problem with the free market is that the only steering comitee it is
supposed to have is the consumers. This is not enough. There will always
be the collective irrationalism to hinder it, besides the consumers do
not have any means of dealing with the cheating in the free market. If
you think so, then tell me why people stick to the hopless Word
wordprocessor of writing documents when there are better alternatives.
Because everybody else uses Word. See what I mean?

And speaking of free market, why does the USA impose a tax on imported
steel now? 

Preben

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Marin David Condic]

"Preben Randhol" <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaet3n4.1kd.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no...
>
> Yes, but then you need goverments that take action when the free market
> doesn't work because the biggest companies uses illegal methods to keep
> their position. You do not need goverments who looks the other way and
> says "ok, but next time try to keep it secret".
>
The concept of a "Free Market" is not quite up there with "Total Chaos" and
those who espouse free markets do not generally condone criminal behavior.
We do need governments to establish laws governing conduct in the
marketplace so that fraud, theft, chaos and destruction are not used as
tools of commerce. (Businessmen are just as capable of being corrupt as are
politicians. Fortunately, they don't usually control the army and police
force. :-) But that doesn't mean that we therefore need governments deciding
what should be made, how it should be made, when it should be made, to whom
it should be given, etc. etc. etc. That is a "Command" economy and every one
ever created has either already collapsed or is on the verge of collapsing.


> The problem with the free market is that the only steering comitee it is
> supposed to have is the consumers. This is not enough. There will always
> be the collective irrationalism to hinder it, besides the consumers do
> not have any means of dealing with the cheating in the free market. If
> you think so, then tell me why people stick to the hopless Word
> wordprocessor of writing documents when there are better alternatives.
> Because everybody else uses Word. See what I mean?
>
Markets may be Efficient, but they are not necessarily Fast. Word didn't
gain its dominance by not offering the customer some kind of value they
couldn't get elsewhere. Once it got its dominance, it can hang onto it for a
good long time, but eventually a better product that better satisfies what
the market wants can and will supplant Word. (Star Office is making inroads
to the market is it not?)

And if the choice of Word is irrational, what substitute would we have to
make the "choice" of word processors more rational? A committee in
Washington deciding what the current best offering is for word processing &
then mandating it be used by all computer users? I'd rather leave it to the
irrational market. :-)

> And speaking of free market, why does the USA impose a tax on imported
> steel now?
>
Who said everyone who votes in the United States is a Milton Friedman Free
Market Advocate in good standing? Voters here run the gammut all the way
from Pure, Unadultrated Fat-Free Capitalists to Absolute Totalitarian
Command Economy Communists and every stripe in between. Politicians who want
to buy votes will cater to the desires of the interest groups out there who
want all sorts of stupid things - including the right to pick the pockets of
their neighbors to buy the stuff they want. Just because an idea is *stupid*
doesn't mean you can't convince a bunch of voters to back it.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Preben Randhol]

On Fri, 24 May 2002 15:51:35 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote:
> The concept of a "Free Market" is not quite up there with "Total Chaos" and
> those who espouse free markets do not generally condone criminal behavior.

I meet with some Americans from the oil industry and they said. Nobody
(in USA) is willing to pay more for a more enviromental oil
production. The goverment would need legislate a restriction for the oil
companies so they have change the production.

I don't say it is criminal behavior at all, I just want to point out
that there are other things to take into account than just economy. That
is why you need somebody who can steer the market.

> Fortunately, they don't usually control the army and police force. :-)
> But that doesn't mean that we therefore need governments deciding what
> should be made, how it should be made, when it should be made, to whom
> it should be given, etc. etc. etc. That is a "Command" economy and
> every one ever created has either already collapsed or is on the verge
> of collapsing.

See above. But there are actually people out there building theories on
how one could have everything private, police, army, judges etc... 

> Word. (Star Office is making inroads to the market is it not?)

I think it is due to: 
   
      1. Microsofts new licensing policy

      2. It can read/write Word files. Although I haven't tried it
         lately.
      
      3. It is cheaper.
      
      4. It is available on several platforms.

In this order of importance.

> And if the choice of Word is irrational, what substitute would we have
> to make the "choice" of word processors more rational? A committee in
> Washington deciding what the current best offering is for word
> processing & then mandating it be used by all computer users? I'd
> rather leave it to the irrational market. :-)

No I was saying a standard open file format, like HTML is for the web.
(Only something much better than HTML though) XML seems to be making
inroads.

> Who said everyone who votes in the United States is a Milton Friedman
> Free Market Advocate in good standing? Voters here run the gammut all
> the way from Pure, Unadultrated Fat-Free Capitalists to Absolute
> Totalitarian Command Economy Communists and every stripe in between.
> Politicians who want to buy votes will cater to the desires of the
> interest groups out there who want all sorts of stupid things -
> including the right to pick the pockets of their neighbors to buy the
> stuff they want. Just because an idea is *stupid* doesn't mean you
> can't convince a bunch of voters to back it.

Are you having elections for congress or something now?

Preben

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Frank J. Lhota]

"Preben Randhol" <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaeuhr5.pa.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no...
> I meet with some Americans from the oil industry and they said. Nobody
> (in USA) is willing to pay more for a more enviromental oil
> production.

And you never considered the possibility that oil industry insiders might
have some bias on this issue? :)

 If your point is that US consumers are not willing to pay more for
enviromentally friendly products, I can think of many counterexamples. In
several areas of the country, you can now choose your electric company. When
consumers were given a choice, many opted for energy producers who charged
substantially higher rates, but promised to generate the electricity more
cleanly.

> Are you having elections for congress or something now?

The next election is in the fall. Every other year, on the Tuesday in
November, there is a U.S. election in which every seat in the House of
Representative, and one third of the Senate seats, are up for grabs.

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Preben Randhol]

On Sat, 25 May 2002 06:31:32 -0400, Frank J. Lhota wrote:
> 
> And you never considered the possibility that oil industry insiders might
> have some bias on this issue? :)

Ah sorry I was a bit unclear. It was not only oil industry people and
they were actually hoping the government would do something.

Preben

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Robert Dewar]

"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com> wrote in message news:<acnp5u$a28$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
>  If your point is that US consumers are not willing to pay more for
> enviromentally friendly products, I can think of many counterexamples. In
> several areas of the country, you can now choose your electric company. When
> consumers were given a choice, many opted for energy producers who charged
> substantially higher rates, but promised to generate the electricity more
> cleanly.


Can you cite chapter and verse on this? Sounds like the
kind of thing that someone heard someone else say and
uncritically passed it on. People always like to pass
on things that are consistent with their political
agendas :-)

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Frank J. Lhota]

> Can you cite chapter and verse on this?

"Where Electricity Deregulation Works", WSJ, May 16, 2001.

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Randy Brukardt]

Robert Dewar wrote in message
<5ee5b646.0205250740.196d20c5@posting.google.com>...
>"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:<acnp5u$a28$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
>>  If your point is that US consumers are not willing to pay more for
>> enviromentally friendly products, I can think of many
counterexamples. In
>> several areas of the country, you can now choose your electric
company. When
>> consumers were given a choice, many opted for energy producers who
charged
>> substantially higher rates, but promised to generate the electricity
more
>> cleanly.
>
>
>Can you cite chapter and verse on this? Sounds like the
>kind of thing that someone heard someone else say and
>uncritically passed it on. People always like to pass
>on things that are consistent with their political
>agendas :-)

Our local electric company in Madison (of which I am a stockholder)
sells blocks of wind power to customers here for a surcharge over the
regular rate. They claim to have sold them out and have a waiting list
(and this is confirmed by the financial statements).

I can't say anything about that in general, but certainly it is true in
a small way here in Madison.

                Randy Brukardt.

RE: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Robert C. Leif]

From: Bob Leif
To: Preben Randhol et al.

A word processor in XML that was based on XML schemas and XSL for
presentation would be a very competitive product. If the tables in this
word processor were in XML, they could combine the best of a spreadsheet
and a standard table. The graphics can be done in XML SVG. The user
interface should be XForms. And, the implementation language should be
Ada. The macro language should be an Ada J Code compiler. The
combination of XML and Ada should be very effective in producing
commercial applications. Now, all we need are some entrepreneurs.

-----Original Message-----
From: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
[mailto:comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org] On Behalf Of Preben Randhol
Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 1:12 AM
To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Subject: Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

On Fri, 24 May 2002 15:51:35 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote:
> The concept of a "Free Market" is not quite up there with "Total
Chaos" and
> those who espouse free markets do not generally condone criminal
behavior.

I meet with some Americans from the oil industry and they said. Nobody
(in USA) is willing to pay more for a more enviromental oil
production. The goverment would need legislate a restriction for the oil
companies so they have change the production.

I don't say it is criminal behavior at all, I just want to point out
that there are other things to take into account than just economy. That
is why you need somebody who can steer the market.

> Fortunately, they don't usually control the army and police force. :-)
> But that doesn't mean that we therefore need governments deciding what
> should be made, how it should be made, when it should be made, to whom
> it should be given, etc. etc. etc. That is a "Command" economy and
> every one ever created has either already collapsed or is on the verge
> of collapsing.

See above. But there are actually people out there building theories on
how one could have everything private, police, army, judges etc... 

> Word. (Star Office is making inroads to the market is it not?)

I think it is due to: 
   
      1. Microsofts new licensing policy

      2. It can read/write Word files. Although I haven't tried it
         lately.
      
      3. It is cheaper.
      
      4. It is available on several platforms.

In this order of importance.

> And if the choice of Word is irrational, what substitute would we have
> to make the "choice" of word processors more rational? A committee in
> Washington deciding what the current best offering is for word
> processing & then mandating it be used by all computer users? I'd
> rather leave it to the irrational market. :-)

No I was saying a standard open file format, like HTML is for the web.
(Only something much better than HTML though) XML seems to be making
inroads.

> Who said everyone who votes in the United States is a Milton Friedman
> Free Market Advocate in good standing? Voters here run the gammut all
> the way from Pure, Unadultrated Fat-Free Capitalists to Absolute
> Totalitarian Command Economy Communists and every stripe in between.
> Politicians who want to buy votes will cater to the desires of the
> interest groups out there who want all sorts of stupid things -
> including the right to pick the pockets of their neighbors to buy the
> stuff they want. Just because an idea is *stupid* doesn't mean you
> can't convince a bunch of voters to back it.

Are you having elections for congress or something now?

Preben

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Frank J. Lhota]

Preben Randhol" <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaet3n4.1kd.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no...
> Yes, but then you need goverments that take action when the free market
> doesn't work because the biggest companies uses illegal methods to keep
> their position. You do not need goverments who looks the other way and
> says "ok, but next time try to keep it secret".

Yes, but isn't this a "straw man" argument? Who, outside of doctrinaire
anarchists, has ever argued that companies of any size should be allowed to
use illegal methods?

> The problem with the free market is that the only steering comitee it is
> supposed to have is the consumers. This is not enough. There will always
> be the collective irrationalism to hinder it, besides the consumers do
> not have any means of dealing with the cheating in the free market. If
> you think so, then tell me why people stick to the hopless Word
> wordprocessor of writing documents when there are better alternatives.
> Because everybody else uses Word. See what I mean?

Yes, I do. Ever since I've worked on PC's, there has been a word processor
that was so dominant that no one would entertain any alternative. When I
first did DOS development, that Word Processor was WordStar from MicroPro.
Later, the word processor that held more than 50% of the marketplace was
WordPerfect. At the time, it seemed that with so many people trained in
WordPerfect and so many existing documents in WordPerfect format, nobody
would change word processors. Given the history of this market, why should
we believe that Microsoft Word is the perpetual word processor champion?

> And speaking of free market, why does the USA impose a tax on imported
> steel now?

The answer is obvious: it's a bald attempt to buy votes. Outside of
politics, the imported steel tariff is a terrible idea.

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Preben Randhol]

On Fri, 24 May 2002 19:57:01 GMT, Frank J. Lhota wrote:
> Yes, but isn't this a "straw man" argument? Who, outside of doctrinaire
> anarchists, has ever argued that companies of any size should be allowed to
> use illegal methods?

Silence is consent. It doesn't matter if everybody disagrees if nobody
acts.

> Yes, I do. Ever since I've worked on PC's, there has been a word processor
> that was so dominant that no one would entertain any alternative. When I
> first did DOS development, that Word Processor was WordStar from MicroPro.
> Later, the word processor that held more than 50% of the marketplace was
> WordPerfect. At the time, it seemed that with so many people trained in
> WordPerfect and so many existing documents in WordPerfect format, nobody
> would change word processors. Given the history of this market, why should
> we believe that Microsoft Word is the perpetual word processor champion?

It looks finally to be shaking, but perhaps more because of Microsofts
own decisions than anything else. Another reasons is that other
word processors are mimicking it. Making them little better (actually
sometimes worse as they have to guess the format of the Word files). The
marked would be more free if the document format is standardised. Then
it doesn't matter which implementation is used. If somebody likes Word
then they can use this and somebody else can use
Abiword/KWord/Staroffice etc.. in stead. Then you could start paying for
quality software and support rather than buggy crap.

Preben

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Frank J. Lhota]

For the record, WordPerfect used a different file format than WordStar, and
Microsoft Word has a different format from either one of them. The file
format issue, bothersome as it might be, is surmountable, as the legions of
users who have made the transitions to new word processors can attest.
Actually, it is now easier than ever to switch word processors, thanks to
the RTF format.

Also, the notion that the only way to compete with Word is to look more like
Word is completed wrong. MS Word will always look more like MS Word than any
other word processor. To take on Word, one needs to do something
substantially better than Word. My biggest gripe with Word is performance:
when I edit a large document with Word, my PC starts to resemble a 286. The
latest version of StarOffice may very well do that by taking on Word on
several fronts: lower price (obviously), a cleaner interface, and (thank
God!) better performance. If StarOffice doesn't replace Word, I'm sure that
something else will.

And I am just as sure that once a new company overtakes Microsoft, everyone
will be pontificating that the new company will never lose its #1 spot. :)

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Marin David Condic]

"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:acmmk8$jbp$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> For the record, WordPerfect used a different file format than WordStar,
and
> Microsoft Word has a different format from either one of them. The file
> format issue, bothersome as it might be, is surmountable, as the legions
of
> users who have made the transitions to new word processors can attest.
> Actually, it is now easier than ever to switch word processors, thanks to
> the RTF format.
>
In the end, this really doesn't make much difference. How long does the
average document live? A few days? A few months? How much work is it to
totally recreate the document if suddenly your favorite word processor
disappeared from the face of the earth? Don't most word processors provide
some means of importing and exporting file formats other than their own? (I
know the copy of MS-Word I have here seems to be able to do that...)

In other words, this seems to be a tempest in a teapot. Its a little like
insisting that all microprocessors execute the same instruction set so that
all software would be totally portable - its an unreasonable restriction on
innovation and it doesn't really buy you anything.


>
> And I am just as sure that once a new company overtakes Microsoft,
everyone
> will be pontificating that the new company will never lose its #1 spot. :)
>
And we'll all be complaining about what a bunch of unfair bastards they are
for having done it the way they did and thus gained a total, unbreakable
monopoly on the market. It won't matter if they did it all Open Source and
public file formats. If someone becomes a dominant player, there will be a
bunch of us hating them for it. (Lets come back here in ten years when the
full impact of open source is apparent & see if there isn't a large
contingent out there arguing in favor of totally proprietary, closed
systems...:-)

No company owns their place in the market, so I have faith that they'll
either have to produce value for their customers at a competitive price, or
someone else will. It may take time for things to correct & balance, but on
the whole it works.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Stephen Leake]

"Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:

> In the end, this really doesn't make much difference. How long does the
> average document live? 

I don't know about the "average" document, but I have some that are 5
years old and still being edited. _Not_ in Word :). Some are in LaTeX,
some in FrameMaker. I prefer LaTeX.

> A few days? A few months? How much work is it to totally recreate
> the document if suddenly your favorite word processor disappeared
> from the face of the earth? 

About 1 man year; it's a large and dense document.

> Don't most word processors provide some means of importing and
> exporting file formats other than their own? (I know the copy of
> MS-Word I have here seems to be able to do that...)

Yes, but it's never adequate. If you export RTF from Word, and import
it into FrameMaker, you get the bold fonts and stuff, but you totally
lose the meta-format of headers, paragraph styles, etc. Well, not
_totally_, but you lose enough that I don't try to do it anymore.

> In other words, this seems to be a tempest in a teapot. 

nope. It's a real problem.

So far, the only really long-lived document format is flat ASCII, like
the Internet RFCs.

> Its a little like insisting that all microprocessors execute the
> same instruction set so that all software would be totally portable
> - its an unreasonable restriction on innovation and it doesn't
> really buy you anything.

Um, when is the last time you ran a DOS window on a Windows PC? And
then ran the latest wizzy graphics game on the _same_ PC? you are
benefitting from exactly that requirement!

> > And I am just as sure that once a new company overtakes Microsoft,
> everyone > will be pontificating that the new company will never
> lose its #1 spot. :)
> >
> And we'll all be complaining about what a bunch of unfair bastards they are
> for having done it the way they did and thus gained a total, unbreakable
> monopoly on the market. 

Possibly.

> It won't matter if they did it all Open Source and public file
> formats. 

Actually, I think it will matter. Since the only proven way to make
money from Open Source is to offer good service that the customers
actually want, it will matter a lot.

> If someone becomes a dominant player, there will be a bunch of us
> hating them for it. (Lets come back here in ten years when the full
> impact of open source is apparent & see if there isn't a large
> contingent out there arguing in favor of totally proprietary, closed
> systems...:-)

It will be an interesting experiment. I wonder if comp.lang.ada will
be around in 2012?

-- 
-- Stephe

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Marin David Condic]

"Stephen Leake" <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
news:ulma3orlo.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov...
>
> I don't know about the "average" document, but I have some that are 5
> years old and still being edited. _Not_ in Word :). Some are in LaTeX,
> some in FrameMaker. I prefer LaTeX.
>
Sure, there's things that live a really long time and are really huge. But
in most instances, we're looking at memos, homework assignments,
newsletters, e-mail messages, etc. The fact that some people have big,
long-lived documents doesn't mean that *most* users are going to care that
they can't convert their love-letters to Brittany Spears to some other word
processor. :-) If in your situation, you care about long document life, then
you need to pick a word processor that suits that purpose. Most people who
find themselves using Word don't care because its adequate for their needs &
they're not worried about long life, constant updates, portability to new
technology, etc.


> > A few days? A few months? How much work is it to totally recreate
> > the document if suddenly your favorite word processor disappeared
> > from the face of the earth?
>
> About 1 man year; it's a large and dense document.
>
Sure, but I'd suggest that this is the exception rather than the rule. If
you've got special needs, you may need special tools.


>
> Yes, but it's never adequate. If you export RTF from Word, and import
> it into FrameMaker, you get the bold fonts and stuff, but you totally
> lose the meta-format of headers, paragraph styles, etc. Well, not
> _totally_, but you lose enough that I don't try to do it anymore.
>
Granted, a lot of the exporting/importing is inadequate for a lot of
purposes, but I'd still contend that this isn't the major worry in most
user's lives. They make a document with Word. It has a shelf-life in which
it is maintained with Word. When a better tool comes along, they start their
next document with it and Word collects dust. Or they export/import it and
do the diddling around to get it looking right again with the new tool.


>
> nope. It's a real problem.
>
For some subset of word processor users. It has yet to be demonstrated that
this subset is a majority. Or even big enough for some company to think of
them as a valuable niche that needs to be catered to. There are word
processors out there that will store things in open formats, so I'd suspect
there is a niche, but I'm not yet convinced that this is the Top Priority of
even the users of those processors. I'm not saying it is a *bad* thing for a
word processor to store things in an "open" format. Just that it may not be
a major priority for most word processor users.


> So far, the only really long-lived document format is flat ASCII, like
> the Internet RFCs.
>
I'm all for that. I think most word-processed stuff is way overkill. I got a
big, major improvement moving off of paper & an IBM Selectric and on to
zeros & ones with Teco, SOS, vi, EDT, TPU, etc. Moving from there to Word &
others, I just don't see much added value for 90% of the things I need to
edit. (When you've got to include illustrations, I'd prefer not to do it
with ASCII art, so there is *some* value added with the WYSIWYG stuff.) So
probably for my own purposes, so long as Word can export to ASCII via some
means, and some other processor can suck up ASCII by some means, I don't
need to worry that much about document portability.


>
> Um, when is the last time you ran a DOS window on a Windows PC? And
> then ran the latest wizzy graphics game on the _same_ PC? you are
> benefitting from exactly that requirement!
>
And multiple generations of Word have had upward compatibility with their
file formats. I remain unimpressed. :-) My point is that if we were to
insist that all word processors store their stuff in some specific "open"
format, we might be hamstringing innovation. Just as existence of the 80x86
as a "standard" didn't stop DEC from building the Alpha or Sun from
developing the Sparc, I wouldn't object to a word processor developing its
own "proprietary" file format.If it yields advantages in some contexts,
great. If I need "portability" for my documents, I can always find something
else to use.


>
> Actually, I think it will matter. Since the only proven way to make
> money from Open Source is to offer good service that the customers
> actually want, it will matter a lot.
>
Yes, but there is always The Law Of Unintended Consequences. Open Source has
not been around for a real long time - or if it has been in some senses, it
didn't stop proprietary software from being the dominant modus operandi for
a long time. Currently, you're right - the model requires good service if a
company wants to stay in business. But does that mean there can't be a
dominant player? Does it mean that there won't be some big problems with how
the model operates that we're just not seeing yet?

Consider this: ACT doesn't exactly have a dozen serious competitors to
provide maintenance & support for GNAT. Maybe their service is so wonderful
and prices so low that nobody wants anyone else. Maybe its too much of a
niche market to spawn dozens of competitors. Maybe GNAT is just too big a
body of software for some other firm to pick up and build expertise in fast
enough to catch up with ACT. Maybe GNAT is under so many changes & revisions
by ACT so frequently that a competing vendor couldn't keep up with it or
would figure they had to go their own way anyway, so why try to build their
business on GNAT? It could be a lot of things, but the point is that there
*is* a dominant player with that technology.

Is it conceivable that 10 years from now we might see similar dominant
players for things like Linux? Is it possible that Red Hat could become so
big and powerful that we're all sitting around bitching about what rotten
bastards they are and wishing for "The Good Old Days" when we had Bill Gates
to kick around? Stranger things have happened in the world and we have not
yet seen how the Open Source model might be exploited. Maybe I just have a
hard time believing in panaceas. :-)

>
> It will be an interesting experiment. I wonder if comp.lang.ada will
> be around in 2012?
>
More importantly, will *we* be around in 2012? :-) Ada has been around for
twenty or so years. No reason to believe it won't be around for another 20.
Has Fortran died out yet? Is there a Comp.Lang.Fortran? I think the odds are
pretty good. So what do you say? Let's meet back here in 2012 and ask if
Open Source and open word processor formats and Ada are all as wonderful as
we think they are now. :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Dan Andreatta]

Stephen Leake <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote in message news:<ulma3orlo.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>...
> "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:
> 
> some in FrameMaker. I prefer LaTeX.

Me too...

> > Don't most word processors provide some means of importing and
> > exporting file formats other than their own? (I know the copy of
> > MS-Word I have here seems to be able to do that...)
> 
> Yes, but it's never adequate. If you export RTF from Word, and import
> it into FrameMaker, you get the bold fonts and stuff, but you totally
> lose the meta-format of headers, paragraph styles, etc. Well, not
> _totally_, but you lose enough that I don't try to do it anymore.
> 
> > In other words, this seems to be a tempest in a teapot. 
> 
> nope. It's a real problem.
> 

Some time ago my wife (a chemist like me) had to send a paper to a
scientific journal, and the accepted formats were PDF or
Word98/Win2000, no other combinations Word/Win accepted... Something
is not right here...

Dan

RE: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Robert C. Leif]

From: Bob Leif
To: Dan Andreatta et al.

It is interesting that a significant proportion of Ada users are
chemists. I suspect that it has to do with our scientific upbringing,
which includes an acute sensitivity to the purity of chemicals.

Concerning FrameMaker, I am about to receive version 7, which now can
create XML DTDs and cascading style sheets. The next step is a document
processor that uses schema and XSL. Eventually, the replacement for PDF
should be an XML version of a MHT file. The bottom line is that the GUI
will be a browser application.

-----Original Message-----
From: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
[mailto:comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org] On Behalf Of Dan Andreatta
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 2:32 PM
To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Subject: Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

Stephen Leake <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
news:<ulma3orlo.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>...
> "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>
writes:
> 
> some in FrameMaker. I prefer LaTeX.

Me too...

> > Don't most word processors provide some means of importing and
> > exporting file formats other than their own? (I know the copy of
> > MS-Word I have here seems to be able to do that...)
> 
> Yes, but it's never adequate. If you export RTF from Word, and import
> it into FrameMaker, you get the bold fonts and stuff, but you totally
> lose the meta-format of headers, paragraph styles, etc. Well, not
> _totally_, but you lose enough that I don't try to do it anymore.
> 
> > In other words, this seems to be a tempest in a teapot. 
> 
> nope. It's a real problem.
> 

Some time ago my wife (a chemist like me) had to send a paper to a
scientific journal, and the accepted formats were PDF or
Word98/Win2000, no other combinations Word/Win accepted... Something
is not right here...

Dan

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Marin David Condic]

From what I've seen, I'm not sure why someone would want to use DTDs if they
had XSL. It seems that DTDs can't describe data with nearly the same
accuracy and that the whole thing is rather clumsy & looks like it was
cobbled together out of spare parts. Am I missing something? I'd think that
doing anything to mix up Ada and XML ought to go straight to XSL and ignore
the existence of DTDs.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Robert C. Leif" <rleif@rleif.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1022740563.12528.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org...
>
> Concerning FrameMaker, I am about to receive version 7, which now can
> create XML DTDs and cascading style sheets. The next step is a document
> processor that uses schema and XSL. Eventually, the replacement for PDF
> should be an XML version of a MHT file. The bottom line is that the GUI
> will be a browser application.
>

XML & Ada was RE: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Robert C. Leif]

From: Bob Leif
To: Marin David Condic et al.
DTDs do not resemble Ada. I believe that we should avoid them. Schemas
do resemble collections of Ada data types. I believe that we should
embrace schemas. Extensible Stylesheet Language, XSL, is an incredibly
powerful formatting language, which looks like it will be retrofitted
with a schema. Scalable Vector Graphics, SVG, was created independently
of XSL. However, the new specification states: 

" 2.2. Compatible, Consistent and Extensible
SVG 1.1/1.2/2.0 must be as compatible as possible with the SVG 1.0
specification. 
All elements and attributes should be consistent within SVG, and with
external specifications such as CSS and XSL. This includes the naming of
elements, the set of available attributes and the style properties that
can be used on elements."

-----Original Message-----
From: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
[mailto:comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org] On Behalf Of Marin David Condic
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 7:12 AM
To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Subject: Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

>From what I've seen, I'm not sure why someone would want to use DTDs if
they
had XSL. It seems that DTDs can't describe data with nearly the same
accuracy and that the whole thing is rather clumsy & looks like it was
cobbled together out of spare parts. Am I missing something? I'd think
that
doing anything to mix up Ada and XML ought to go straight to XSL and
ignore
the existence of DTDs.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Robert C. Leif" <rleif@rleif.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1022740563.12528.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org...
>
> Concerning FrameMaker, I am about to receive version 7, which now can
> create XML DTDs and cascading style sheets. The next step is a
document
> processor that uses schema and XSL. Eventually, the replacement for
PDF
> should be an XML version of a MHT file. The bottom line is that the
GUI
> will be a browser application.
>

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Marin David Condic]

Just for the record - I didn't say this. Its an easy error to make but
please try to clip the attributions appropriately - it can lead to confusion
about who said what. Thanks.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Dan Andreatta" <andreatta@mail.chem.sc.edu> wrote in message
news:338040f8.0205291332.70a29d53@posting.google.com...
> Stephen Leake <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
news:<ulma3orlo.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>...
> > "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:
> >
> > some in FrameMaker. I prefer LaTeX.
>

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Stephen Leake]

andreatta@mail.chem.sc.edu (Dan Andreatta) writes:

> Some time ago my wife (a chemist like me) had to send a paper to a
> scientific journal, and the accepted formats were PDF or
> Word98/Win2000, no other combinations Word/Win accepted... Something
> is not right here...

Yes, what's not right is that they accept _any_ version of Word :).

Sorry, couldn't resist!

-- 
-- Stephe

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[John Doe]

> In the end, this really doesn't make much difference. How long does the
> average document live? A few days? A few months? How much work is it to
> totally recreate the document if suddenly your favorite word processor
> disappeared from the face of the earth? Don't most word processors provide

.... now that OCR and voice recog is fairly effective ....

-- 
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <slrnaet3n4.1kd.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> writes:

> The problem with the free market is that the only steering comitee it is
> supposed to have is the consumers. This is not enough. There will always
> be the collective irrationalism to hinder it, besides the consumers do
> not have any means of dealing with the cheating in the free market.

Certainly they do.  They can band together.  One of the earliest examples
of this is called "government".

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Preben Randhol]

On 24 May 2002 14:54:17 -0600, Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> In article <slrnaet3n4.1kd.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> writes:
> 
>> The problem with the free market is that the only steering comitee it is
>> supposed to have is the consumers. This is not enough. There will always
>> be the collective irrationalism to hinder it, besides the consumers do
>> not have any means of dealing with the cheating in the free market.
> 
> Certainly they do.  They can band together.  One of the earliest examples
> of this is called "government".

Heheheh I rest my case ;-)

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Marin David Condic]

"Preben Randhol" <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaet8fh.ab0.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no...
>
> Heheheh I rest my case ;-)
>
But it sounds as if you think that anyone who espouses a free market economy
is 100% opposed to any government oversight of public conduct. This is
obviously not true. I certainly don't think that the government should never
get involved in regulating or prosecuting businesses & businessmen. We might
differ considerably on exactly how much and when, but I don't think *anyone*
makes the case that companies should be able to operate in any manner they
see fit and the only people they have to answer to is the consumer (which,
by the way, is all of us at some points in time, right?)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com

Re: Microsoft takes on history

[Marin David Condic]

"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:2TvH8.1710$Np5.1619@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
> written in 1967, and since then many of the book's examples of companies
> that were unbeatable has taken a beating. Contrary to the book's
contention,
> we have seen major retailers go bankrupt: we may soon see K-Mart join the
> ranks of Montgomery Ward, Grants, Gimbels , and Child World. GM has lost
> control of its market. Galbraith does write about a retailer whose
dominance
> cannot be challenged, but it was not Wal-Mart. And in the area of
computers,
> this tome treats the very idea that some guys working out of a garage
could
> threaten IBM's dominance with great derision.
>
Capitalism without failure is like Religion without sin! :-)

Never said that it would be easy to challenge the market dominance of a
large corporation. Said it can and has happened.


> In short, the notion that Microsoft is impervious to challengers from
> smaller companies (are there any other kind) should be taken with a grain
of
> salt. Microsoft once played the role of David against IBM's Goliath; now
> that Microsoft is in the role of Goliath, it would take just one company
> with the next great new idea to bring MS to its knees.
>
Maybe a pound of salt. :-) No company is impervious. Any company can fail.
We've seen too many examples of very large companies either being displaced
as the market leader or outright going bankrupt to be convinced in the
imperviousness of any large corporation - given some time, of course. Open
Source software and small companies that exploit it could kill or
significantly shrink Microsoft. Its Darwin in action! Small companies can
now distribute software at near zero cost and recoup their engineering costs
in services and are willing to forgo billions in profit in order to more
reliably make mere millions (or at least a comfortable living!) and that's
just too bad for Microsoft. You adapt, or you die.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[David Marceau]

"Frank J. Lhota" wrote:
> In short, the notion that Microsoft is impervious to challengers from
> smaller companies (are there any other kind) should be taken with a grain of
> salt. Microsoft once played the role of David against IBM's Goliath; now
> that Microsoft is in the role of Goliath, it would take just one company
> with the next great new idea to bring MS to its knees.

IMHO "David and Goliath" does not reflect the reality.

I may be wrong but from what I understand Mr. Bill Gates has an IBM VIP
uncle.
I'm not saying Mr. Gates doesn't work hard or doesn't work smart.  I'm
just saying he has great connections.
Good for him.

IMHO I perceive it more as "David and UNCLE Goliath" :)  

Sant� bonheur,
David Marceau

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Preben Randhol]

On Fri, 24 May 2002 16:29:58 -0400, David Marceau wrote:
> IMHO "David and Goliath" does not reflect the reality.
> 
> I may be wrong but from what I understand Mr. Bill Gates has an IBM VIP
> uncle.
> I'm not saying Mr. Gates doesn't work hard or doesn't work smart.  I'm
> just saying he has great connections.
> Good for him.
> 
> IMHO I perceive it more as "David and UNCLE Goliath" :)  

Yes the problem is evident when M$ forces Intel not to embrace Linux or
threatens other companies that they will pull out advertisments etc if
they touch Linux.

Preben

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Frank J. Lhota]

> I may be wrong but from what I understand Mr. Bill Gates has an IBM VIP
> uncle.
> I'm not saying Mr. Gates doesn't work hard or doesn't work smart.  I'm
> just saying he has great connections.
> Good for him.
>
> IMHO I perceive it more as "David and UNCLE Goliath" :)

I think it's time to move this thread to a history of computing NG.

In the first years of the IBM/PC, IBM and Microsoft were indeed partners. It
was this partnership that produced MS-DOS as the standard OS for IBM's first
personal computer. Originally, OS/2 was a joint IBM / MS venture. When OS/2
version 1.x tanked, it created a rift between the two companies. IBM still
saw OS/2 as the wave of the future, but Microsoft wanted to drop it and base
its new operating systems on Windows. For better or worse, the MS approach
won out.

In recent years, IBM seems to have lost interest in OS/2 -- hopefully,
they'll make OS/2 open source. Now they are enthusiastically backing Linux.
Given that, it does not sound like IBM is trying to rekindle a Microsoft
partnership.

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Robert Dewar]

"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com> wrote in message news:<acmn8f$lmd$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...

> In the first years of the IBM/PC, IBM and Microsoft were indeed partners. It
> was this partnership that produced MS-DOS as the standard OS for IBM's first
> personal computer. 

That's misleading. When the PC came out, it was sold without an operating
system. I remember well going into the IBM store (IBM was briefly in the
retail business) and buying a machine, and then I asked about the operating
system. I was pointed to a bin marked operating systems. I found UCSD, CPM
and MS/DOS. I bought a copy of CPM and MS/DOS, and played with both. MS/DOS
at that time was purely a microsoft product, and was not specially pushed
by IBM, although most certainly IBM had help cause it to be produced. In
practice MS/DOS won out in the market place over the other alternatives,
because for one thing it was a fraction of the price of the alternatives.

I think I still have my copy of CPM :-)

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Frank J. Lhota]

> I think I still have my copy of CPM :-)

Great! I was once tempted to buy a copy of MS-DOS 1.0 when I saw it for sale
for $10. I thought it would make a great curio, although it would be
difficult to use it on current PC's.

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Steve Doiel]

"Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
news:5ee5b646.0205250319.324e9ff8@posting.google.com...
> "Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:<acmn8f$lmd$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
>
> > In the first years of the IBM/PC, IBM and Microsoft were indeed
partners. It
> > was this partnership that produced MS-DOS as the standard OS for IBM's
first
> > personal computer.
>
> That's misleading. When the PC came out, it was sold without an operating
> system. I remember well going into the IBM store (IBM was briefly in the
> retail business) and buying a machine, and then I asked about the
operating
> system. I was pointed to a bin marked operating systems. I found UCSD, CPM
> and MS/DOS. I bought a copy of CPM and MS/DOS, and played with both.
MS/DOS
> at that time was purely a microsoft product, and was not specially pushed
> by IBM, although most certainly IBM had help cause it to be produced. In
> practice MS/DOS won out in the market place over the other alternatives,
> because for one thing it was a fraction of the price of the alternatives.

Gee.  I always thought PCDOS was bundled with those old 16k machines, and
the only readily available alternative was CPM86.  I associate UCSD with the
Apple II's and CPM with the old 8080/Z80 based machines.

It was my understanding that IBM paid Microsoft a one-time ridicuously low
fee for distributing PCDOS with their machines.  IBM did not maintain
exclusive rights and Microsoft made big money on selling MSDOS to clone
makers.

But then of course I was a poor student at the time and wasn't in the market
for a PC :-)

SteveD

>
> I think I still have my copy of CPM :-)

ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Frank J. Lhota]

"Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
> I think I still have my copy of CPM :-)

That reminds me of a former co-worker who was a big CP/M fan. He told me
once that there was a CP/M - based Janus compiler for a small subset of Ada.
Has anyone here heard of it? I'm curious about how much of the language they
could do under CP/M.

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Robert Dewar]

"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<WdPH8.6060$Np5.1189@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>...
> "Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
> > I think I still have my copy of CPM :-)
> 
> That reminds me of a former co-worker who was a big CP/M fan. He told me
> once that there was a CP/M - based Janus compiler for a small subset of Ada.
> Has anyone here heard of it? I'm curious about how much of the language they
> could do under CP/M.


You could certainly do a full language compiler for a
CP/M machine if there was a demand ...

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Adrian Hoe]

dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote in message news:<5ee5b646.0205251457.788ad9b6@posting.google.com>...
> "Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<WdPH8.6060$Np5.1189@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>...
> > "Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
> > > I think I still have my copy of CPM :-)
> > 
> > That reminds me of a former co-worker who was a big CP/M fan. He told me
> > once that there was a CP/M - based Janus compiler for a small subset of Ada.
> > Has anyone here heard of it? I'm curious about how much of the language they
> > could do under CP/M.
> 
> 
> You could certainly do a full language compiler for a
> CP/M machine if there was a demand ...


I was once a CP/M fan. I am still having the Apple CP/M Ada compiler
in 5.25" diskette. I dont' know if the diskette is still readable or
not (it has been almost 20 years which I started to have the diskette
in mid 1980s). I don't know what Ada compiler it is.

I can still remember faintly the compiler messages:

lexical analysis++++++++
semantic analysis++++++++++++

something like that. Any idea which Ada it was?
-- 
                                       -- Adrian Hoe
                                       -- http://adrianhoe.com

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Randy Brukardt]

Adrian Hoe wrote in message
<9ff447f2.0205252157.78b290ff@posting.google.com>...
>dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote in message
news:<5ee5b646.0205251457.788ad9b6@posting.google.com>...
>> "Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:<WdPH8.6060$Np5.1189@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>...
>> > "Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
>> > > I think I still have my copy of CPM :-)
>> >
>> > That reminds me of a former co-worker who was a big CP/M fan. He
told me
>> > once that there was a CP/M - based Janus compiler for a small
subset of Ada.
>> > Has anyone here heard of it? I'm curious about how much of the
language they
>> > could do under CP/M.
>>
>>
>> You could certainly do a full language compiler for a
>> CP/M machine if there was a demand ...
>
>
>I was once a CP/M fan. I am still having the Apple CP/M Ada compiler
>in 5.25" diskette. I dont' know if the diskette is still readable or
>not (it has been almost 20 years which I started to have the diskette
>in mid 1980s). I don't know what Ada compiler it is.
>
>I can still remember faintly the compiler messages:
>
>lexical analysis++++++++
>semantic analysis++++++++++++
>
>something like that. Any idea which Ada it was?

There were two that I know of, the Stupidsoft (sorry, old habits:
Supersoft) Ada, and our Janus/Ada. Looking at the messages, you probably
had the bad guys. :-)

It was quite a trick to compile a useful subset of Ada on a 56K machine.
OTOH, targetting that machine is not particularly difficult. For Ada 83,
the Janus/Ada runtime never exceeded 12K on the 16-bit machines, Z-80
code was quite a bit more compact and also much more aminable to
compression.

So, I don't think that there would be any particular difficulty
targetting Janus/Ada 95 to such a machine (with compiler running on
Windows or Linux). You probably couldn't use every possible Ada feature
in programs targetting such a machine, but the sorts of programs
developed for such memory-limited systems don't do that anyway.

If anyone is interested in such a target, I'd be happy to try to figure
out how to read the 8" CP/M floppies that contain the source code to
those versions. (Our last CP/M machine doesn't boot anymore, couldn't
figure out why.)

           Randy Brukardt
           R.R. Software, Inc.

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Marin David Condic]

Considering you can do a full implementation of Ada for a machine that has
*no* operating system whatsoever, that isn't exactly a bold and daring
claim. :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
news:5ee5b646.0205251457.788ad9b6@posting.google.com...
>
>
> You could certainly do a full language compiler for a
> CP/M machine if there was a demand ...

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <ad0b0g$mso$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:
> Considering you can do a full implementation of Ada for a machine that has
> *no* operating system whatsoever, that isn't exactly a bold and daring
> claim. :-)

There are several Ada implementations for Microsoft Windows :-)

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Marin David Condic]

"Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message
news:11ygPOFJtduS@eisner.encompasserve.org...
> In article <ad0b0g$mso$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, "Marin David Condic"
<dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:
> > Considering you can do a full implementation of Ada for a machine that
has
> > *no* operating system whatsoever, that isn't exactly a bold and daring
> > claim. :-)
>
> There are several Ada implementations for Microsoft Windows :-)

You would be suggesting that Windows does not qualify as an Operating
System? I've heard it described as a Computer Virus with a GUI Interface.
:-) But in fairness, at least Windows provides lots of primitives that would
help support an Ada program without having the compiler supply its own RTK.
How well they work and how well they fit Ada's needs are, quite naturally,
debatable.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Darren New]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> You would be suggesting that Windows does not qualify as an Operating
> System? I've heard it described as a Computer Virus with a GUI Interface.

And, of course, it depends on *which* "Windows" you're talking about. While
it's arguable that Win3.1 (say)  might not be what folks would consider an
"operating system" (altho, funny enough, nobody complained that CP/M wasn't
an operating system), Win2K certainly is an operating system.

-- 
Darren New 
San Diego, CA, USA (PST). Cryptokeys on demand.
** http://home.san.rr.com/dnew/DNResume.html **
** http://images.fbrtech.com/dnew/ **

     My brain needs a "back" button so I can
         remember where I left my coffee mug.

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Marin David Condic]

I know there is a strong anti-Windows contingent out there, but I don't feel
that strongly about it. When I first saw WinNT, I kind of concluded: "Wow!
VMS in disguise.... Finally, Micro$oft has a *real* operating system" I
promptly dumped my broken Mac laptop and bought a PC with NT. (I wouldn't
own a PC until Intel finally got around all that silly segmented address
space stuff by making really huge segments! The M680x0 in the Mac never
presented those sorts of limitations.)

Now one can stand here all day and complain about "NT-this" and "NT-that"
and "Linux is better" and so on and so on, but at least NT provided all the
facilities one would expect from a "real" operating system. Compared to the
MS-DOS based versions of Windows and (most, at least) Macintosh operating
systems - all of which I considered "toy" operating systems - you had WinNT
finally looking like the kind of thing one would expect for a workstation or
larger computer. There may be *better* OS's out there but at least I can
take NT and its descendents seriously.

And it usually seems to work fine in supporting Ada compilers, so I consider
it an adequate platform for developing Ada software. (How's that for making
sure to bring it back on topic? :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Darren New" <dnew@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3CF575B0.CD59AC6C@san.rr.com...
> Marin David Condic wrote:
> > You would be suggesting that Windows does not qualify as an Operating
> > System? I've heard it described as a Computer Virus with a GUI
Interface.
>
> And, of course, it depends on *which* "Windows" you're talking about.
While
> it's arguable that Win3.1 (say)  might not be what folks would consider an
> "operating system" (altho, funny enough, nobody complained that CP/M
wasn't
> an operating system), Win2K certainly is an operating system.
>

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Jeffrey Carter]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> 
> When I first saw WinNT, I kind of concluded: "Wow!
> VMS in disguise.... 

Interesting. I know more than one person whose reactions were "Wow! UNIX
in disguise...".

-- 
Jeff Carter
"I unclog my nose towards you."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Marin David Condic]

Maybe more like Unix in drag. :-)

Still, NT was developed by ex-DEC guys who had been key players in VMS, so
it isn't surprising that it has a lot in common with VMS. Its been noted
before that WNT is VMS++ - possibly no accident. Also, I've heard
accusations here that VMS code was pirated in the process - doubt that was
ever substantiated. Its not a VMS clone, but it does share lots of similar
features and in my mind that started qualifying it as a "Real OS"

But then none of us VMS Bigots will likely be happy with anything else until
it looks and works exactly like VMS. :-)

You know you're a VMS bigot when:

You think case sensitivity is some ones idea of an April Fools joke

You keep trying to use the EDT keypad in Word.

You know why the SHOW SYSTEM display had to have the "system uptime"
field increased beyond 999 days.

etc. etc. etc.


MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Jeffrey Carter" <jrcarter@acm.org> wrote in message
news:3CF7BE9A.A9B0F04@acm.org...
>
> Interesting. I know more than one person whose reactions were "Wow! UNIX
> in disguise...".
>

[OT] VMS, was: Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Simon Clubley]

In article <ad8fib$aq8$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:
> 
> But then none of us VMS Bigots will likely be happy with anything else until
> it looks and works exactly like VMS. :-)
> 
> You know you're a VMS bigot when:
> 
> You think case sensitivity is some ones idea of an April Fools joke
> 
> You keep trying to use the EDT keypad in Word.
> 

If anyone knows how to do this in Word, feel free to let me know. :-)

> You know why the SHOW SYSTEM display had to have the "system uptime"
> field increased beyond 999 days.
> 
> etc. etc. etc.
> 

You can find the full list here (as well as many other places):

http://axp603.gsi.de:8080/www/vms/fun/bigot.htmlx

Of course, what would be fun would be an Ada version.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP       
Microsoft: The Lada of the computing world.

Re: ON Topic: Ada for CP/M

[Robert Dewar]

"Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> wrote in message news:<ad0b0g$mso$1@nh.pace.co.uk>...

> Considering you can do a full implementation of Ada for a machine that has
> *no* operating system whatsoever, that isn't exactly a bold and daring
> claim. :-)

You miss the point. Of course CP/M is perectly adequate to support Ada
from a functional view, but typical CP/M machines have VERY little memory,
typically not more than 64K bytes, and often less, and it is a little
daring to say you can fit a full Ada run-time in that small a space :-)

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Randy Brukardt]

Robert Dewar wrote in message
<5ee5b646.0205250319.324e9ff8@posting.google.com>...
>"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:<acmn8f$lmd$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
>
>> In the first years of the IBM/PC, IBM and Microsoft were indeed
partners. It
>> was this partnership that produced MS-DOS as the standard OS for
IBM's first
>> personal computer.
>
>That's misleading. When the PC came out, it was sold without an
operating
>system. I remember well going into the IBM store (IBM was briefly in
the
>retail business) and buying a machine, and then I asked about the
operating
>system. I was pointed to a bin marked operating systems. I found UCSD,
CPM
>and MS/DOS. I bought a copy of CPM and MS/DOS, and played with both.
MS/DOS
>at that time was purely a microsoft product, and was not specially
pushed
>by IBM, although most certainly IBM had help cause it to be produced.
In
>practice MS/DOS won out in the market place over the other
alternatives,
>because for one thing it was a fraction of the price of the
alternatives.
>
>I think I still have my copy of CPM :-)

Robert's memory isn't quite right (or he came late to the PC), but it
isn't far off.

When the PC was originally introduced, it had three operating systems as
Robert mentioned. However, two of the bins (UCSD and CP/M-86) were
labeled "available soon". Everyone expected CPM to be the dominant OS.
However, it wasn't available until the following spring, so almost
everybody bought their PCs with PC-DOS (MS-DOS) installed.

We (R.R. Software) didn't buy one at all, since we had a Seattle
Computer 10 MHZ 8086 machine, which ran 86-DOS, which is what Bill Gates
bought for $50K to make MS-DOS. And that machine had double-sided 8"
disks, which held 1.2 Meg each, rather than the puny 160K of the PC. We
did some testing on a friend's machine to insure that Janus/Ada was
compatible.

By the time CP/M-86 did come out, so many people were using PC-DOS
(MS-DOS on clones) that it had already reached critical mass, and
CP/M-86 never caught on. (Probably because it really had no advantage
over MS-DOS.)

When the XT came out (with the whopping 10 Megabyte hard disk), we ran
out to get one. We managed to snag one of the original demo units (the
box had a large label saying "Do not open until <intro date>.") That
turned out to be lucky, because the IBM XTs mostly had an unreliable
hard disk; but the demo units had a more expensive (for IBM) german disk
that was rock solid. After the machine was no longer useful for
development, we ran our BBS system on it for years; it was still working
when we gave it to charity (which also was our landlord) in 1995(?). [He
promptly broke it. We could never get it working again after he took it
home.]

Sigh. Too much unimportant information.

                 Randy Brukardt.

Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Robert Dewar]

"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com> wrote in message news:<acmn8f$lmd$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...

> I think it's time to move this thread to a history of 
> computing NG.

Well this is surely more interesting than these endless
Ada advocacy threads that take place on CLA every now
and then :-)

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[chris.danx]

"Wes Groleau" <wesgroleau@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:3CED2E66.DD15C13D@despammed.com...
>
>
> > I'm curious what, if any, response ACT has to Microsoft's recent
> > efforts to convince the DoD to ban Free Software. (see
>
> I'm interested in ACT's reaction also.
>
> Putting this one along with MANY other Microsoft actions
> recently, my reaction is that Microsoft must be in big trouble
> to be so panicky lately about Open Source.

They're <you pick> themselves cos' the competition is coming in to take
their business and they don't like it.  Linux is getting in on the server
market, so MS haven't got as many customers in that area as they'd like and
it's becoming increasingly easier to use Linux, so it might hit sales in the
desktop market.  If they get OpenSource banned stateside, Linux will go down
the lavvy pan, then MS will rule!  Or atleast that's what makes sense to
them.  (I don't even like Linux, but the fact remains it's gaining
popularity and support from all sectors)

There was another article about microsoft new licensing schemes forcing
schools to only use windows on all of their hardware, even macs!  I
attribute this to two things, one schools are run by techno-illeterates and
microsoft think they're easy pickings (i can personally testify to schools
and techno-illeterates; when I was at school I had to write step by step
manuals for our teachers to use several very very simple software packages
(hyperstack(?) based things), and they were using macs which are one of the
easiest systems to use!) and two Mac now has a reasonable OS in Darwin/Mac
OS X.

Also there is the fact that the pc sector seems saturated, almost everyone
who wants (or can afford) a pc has one, meaning a great big chunk of their
marker is disappearing day by day.

Looks like they're getting desparate and clutching at straws!  (the idea the
us goverment would want to increase costs is a complete absurdity.  Why have
one very expensive bomb when you can have ten cheap ones that work much the
same?)


Chris

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Ted Dennison]

chris.danx wrote:


> There was another article about microsoft new licensing schemes forcing
> schools to only use windows on all of their hardware, even macs!  I
> attribute this to two things, one schools are run by techno-illeterates and


I'd think it more likely that they just find financially-strapped 
organizations like schools easier pickings for financial blackmail.

In the slashdot thread about that, there was an accusation posted by an 
AC that Microsoft came in and shut down a head-start program he had 
volunteered at in a very poor area of Iowa becuase they couldn't come up 
with documentation proving licenses for all the software on their 
(donated) computers. Since it was from an anonomous account, it has to 
be taken with a grain of salt. But some folks believed it without 
question. I consider it a really bad sign that folks would even consider 
this to be plausable behavior out of a company. That's just despicable 
beyond belief.

> Also there is the fact that the pc sector seems saturated, almost everyone
> who wants (or can afford) a pc has one, meaning a great big chunk of their
> marker is disappearing day by day.
> 
> Looks like they're getting desparate and clutching at straws!  (the idea the


I had read one article in Motley Fool (I forget where, sorry) about how 
Microsoft has basicly been living off of funny-money for the last 
several years. Something about giving stock options as pay to their 
employees, then writing off the difference on their taxes when the stock 
value goes up.

...Ahhh...found the link. Here: 
http://www.fool.com/portfolios/rulemaker/2000/rulemaker000217.htm

The problem with doing this kind of thing, as folks like CFS here in 
Tulsa a few years back, and Enron a little more publicly have shown, is 
that if your company's value rests primarily on transient things like 
its stock value, it can all go away when the wind changes direction. And 
when it starts to go, it goes *fast*. So when Microsoft stock starts to 
slip, as it has done recently, its not like your GM or GE stock slipping 
a bit. Things could get Bad.

So anyway, what we *could* be witnessing here is desparate attempts to 
prevent an Enron-style progressive collapse of the company, by finding 
new revenue streams during a bad economy. Just a theory.

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Adrian Hoe]

"chris.danx" <spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:<WLaH8.1180$bs1.117887@news8-gui.server.ntli.net>...
> "Wes Groleau" <wesgroleau@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:3CED2E66.DD15C13D@despammed.com...
> >
> >
> > > I'm curious what, if any, response ACT has to Microsoft's recent
> > > efforts to convince the DoD to ban Free Software. (see
> >
> > I'm interested in ACT's reaction also.
> >
> > Putting this one along with MANY other Microsoft actions
> > recently, my reaction is that Microsoft must be in big trouble
> > to be so panicky lately about Open Source.
> 
> They're <you pick> themselves cos' the competition is coming in to take
> their business and they don't like it.  Linux is getting in on the server
> market, so MS haven't got as many customers in that area as they'd like and
> it's becoming increasingly easier to use Linux, so it might hit sales in the
> desktop market.  If they get OpenSource banned stateside, Linux will go down
> the lavvy pan, then MS will rule!  Or atleast that's what makes sense to
> them.  (I don't even like Linux, but the fact remains it's gaining
> popularity and support from all sectors)


Try Linux! You will fall in love with it. I once tried Linux
(OpenLinux 1.2) and I did not quite like it. After a while of mingling
around, I started to love it. I am an advance user nowaday!

If you use Microsoft, you are just one of the generous contributor to
Bill's wealth! And what do you get? At least, I use Linux and I save
all the money buying Microsoft's to own a PS2.

OpenSource should stay. It proliferate software revolution!

-- 
                                       -- Adrian Hoe
                                       -- http://adrianhoe.com

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[chris.danx]

"Adrian Hoe" <byhoe@greenlime.com> wrote in message
news:9ff447f2.0205231909.40170d61@posting.google.com...

> Try Linux! You will fall in love with it. I once tried Linux
> (OpenLinux 1.2) and I did not quite like it. After a while of mingling
> around, I started to love it. I am an advance user nowaday!

I have SuSE 8.0 Linux sitting in a box, my builtin raid controller isn't
supported and no one seems to be able to answer my question on whether or
not the new bios patch for the mobo will allow me to take the dvd/cd and put
them on the ide channels where the hdds are (I have already tried switching
the RAID functionality to ATA and see if the installer could detect the hdds
as they are but it couldn't, which makes me wonder if it could detect the
dvd and cdrw if they were on the controller).

> If you use Microsoft, you are just one of the generous contributor to
> Bill's wealth!

I do not need to buy anymore software from MS (except maybe age of
mythology), so I will no longer contribute in a material sense.

> And what do you get? At least, I use Linux and I save
> all the money buying Microsoft's to own a PS2.

Linux isn't quite ready for the other ppl who live here, the learning curve
is still too steep, but maybe in the future I will consider it for more than
developing my own OS (GNAT for NT is just too much of a pain for this,
perhaps this will change with it's integration into the gcc toolchain).


> OpenSource should stay. It proliferate software revolution!

Unfortunately the software revolution is forgetting proper design
documentation.  Sure (most of) the software is designed initially but the
design documents aren't always available which reduces changes to the
software by other programmers  to 'hacking'.  To me the design is more
important than the code, after all if the code is broke you can refer to the
design to see exactly what it's supposed to do and it's relation to the
whole system and apply a fix that won't break the design.  The design
specifies the intent, the code merely carries out that intent.


Chris

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Ingo Marks]

chris.danx wrote:

> I have SuSE 8.0 Linux sitting in a box, my builtin raid controller isn't
> supported and no one seems to be able to answer my question on whether or
> not the new bios patch for the mobo will allow me to take the dvd/cd and
> put them on the ide channels where the hdds are (I have already tried
> switching the RAID functionality to ATA and see if the installer could
> detect the hdds as they are but it couldn't, which makes me wonder if it
> could detect the dvd and cdrw if they were on the controller).

I am a SuSE Linux user for long years. In my experience it is best to wait 
for at least minor version 3. I tried 6.1 and worked for a long time with 
6.4. Later I tried Suse 7.0, 7.1, 7.2 and was not satisfied. Only 7.3 was 
rock solid with good device support.

So if you really want to use SuSE 8 then you should wait at least for SuSE 
8.3.

Regards,
Ingo

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[chris.danx]

"Ingo Marks" <adv@region-nord.de> wrote in message
news:aclfpe$kc3$03$1@news.t-online.com...
>
> I am a SuSE Linux user for long years. In my experience it is best to wait
> for at least minor version 3. I tried 6.1 and worked for a long time with
> 6.4. Later I tried Suse 7.0, 7.1, 7.2 and was not satisfied. Only 7.3 was
> rock solid with good device support.

Thanks, I wish i'd have known that when I bought 8.0!


> So if you really want to use SuSE 8 then you should wait at least for SuSE
> 8.3.

Oh bugger it, where's the screwdriver???

OT: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Wilhelm Spickermann]

--Am Freitag, Mai 24, 2002 15:32:24 +0100 schrieb "chris.danx" 
<spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com>:

> "Ingo Marks" <adv@region-nord.de> wrote in message
> news:aclfpe$kc3$03$1@news.t-online.com...
>>
>> I am a SuSE Linux user for long years. In my experience it is
>> best to wait for at least minor version 3. I tried 6.1 and
>> worked for a long time with 6.4. Later I tried Suse 7.0, 7.1,
>> 7.2 and was not satisfied. Only 7.3 was rock solid with good
>> device support.
>
> Thanks, I wish i'd have known that when I bought 8.0!

I have to support what Ingo said. Try to copy a 7.3. (In our 
local linux user group mailing list, we have a "distribution 
war" from time to time and SuSE 8.0 was the first one where 
nothing happend because all SuSE fans stayed quiet.) If things 
continue to go in that direction, I will change to another 
distri -- and I've started using SuSE before they started 
numbering their distris. :-(

Concerning the raid controller mainboard:

1: have you tried http://www.promise.com/support/suse_eng.asp ?
(I don't know anything about it, but if promise has an own linux 
driver for that board, it should be there.)

2: If you search the internet, search for the chip number. The 
guys writing device drivers have had bad experiences with names 
of boards, sale names etc. -- it only leads to confusion. So 
they prefer to talk about chip numbers.

Good luck
  Wilhelm

Re: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[chris.danx]

"Wilhelm Spickermann" <wilhelm.spickermann@spickermann-d.de> wrote in
message news:mailman.1022263262.23190.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org...
>
>
> --Am Freitag, Mai 24, 2002 15:32:24 +0100 schrieb "chris.danx"
> <spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com>:
>
> > "Ingo Marks" <adv@region-nord.de> wrote in message
> > news:aclfpe$kc3$03$1@news.t-online.com...
> >>
> >> I am a SuSE Linux user for long years. In my experience it is
> >> best to wait for at least minor version 3. I tried 6.1 and
> >> worked for a long time with 6.4. Later I tried Suse 7.0, 7.1,
> >> 7.2 and was not satisfied. Only 7.3 was rock solid with good
> >> device support.
> >
> > Thanks, I wish i'd have known that when I bought 8.0!
>
> I have to support what Ingo said. Try to copy a 7.3. (In our
> local linux user group mailing list, we have a "distribution
> war" from time to time and SuSE 8.0 was the first one where
> nothing happend because all SuSE fans stayed quiet.) If things
> continue to go in that direction, I will change to another
> distri -- and I've started using SuSE before they started
> numbering their distris. :-(

on alt.os.linux.suse many ppl seem to think 8.0 is not too good, they
believe it was rushed out to be the first with KDE 3.  Unfortunately no one
new this until it's release and loads of ppl had pre-ordered it.

> Concerning the raid controller mainboard:
>
> 1: have you tried http://www.promise.com/support/suse_eng.asp ?
> (I don't know anything about it, but if promise has an own linux
> driver for that board, it should be there.)

Tried there every two weeks since 8.0 was delivered.

> 2: If you search the internet, search for the chip number. The
> guys writing device drivers have had bad experiences with names
> of boards, sale names etc. -- it only leads to confusion. So
> they prefer to talk about chip numbers.


(02/03/22 1.220.1.24)
	Add Promise 20276 to supported IDE controllers


Ah feck, you've got to be kidding me?  Kernel 2.19 pre 5 has some support
for this chipset :<.  I was told 2.18 supported the raid chipset which is
why I bought SuSE 8.0, nuttzzz.

Tonight I removed two IDE cables and ditched using the raid controller and
now that seems uneccessary.  If only I'd known chipset numbers where the
thing to go for, there wouldn't have been such a palava in here (first time
actually did something to the pc).

Hmm, now I'm wondering if it's possible to install SuSE with another kernel
instead of the one it's got, and get the installer to work with it?  Nick is
a pc techie guy I know and he'll be in the area tomorrow so it'd be great to
find out how to do this before then and take him up on his offer.  Any
suggestions?


Chris

Re: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Wilhelm Spickermann]

--Am Samstag, Mai 25, 2002 01:15:07 +0100 schrieb "chris.danx" 
<spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com>:

> Ah feck, you've got to be kidding me?  Kernel 2.19 pre 5 has
> some support for this chipset :<.  I was told 2.18 supported
> the raid chipset which is why I bought SuSE 8.0, nuttzzz.

It may be true: a kernel x.y.z is very different to a x.y.z-SUSE 
kernel. They always have many additional device drivers in their 
kernels. So it may be just a bug as thought before -- I don't 
know. After installing the kernel source package, you can search 
it with something like:
find /usr/src/linux-2.4.18.SuSE -type f -exec grep 20276 {} \; 
-print

> Hmm, now I'm wondering if it's possible to install SuSE with
> another kernel instead of the one it's got, and get the
> installer to work with it?

I've never tried to replace a SuSE-Kernel by a normal one and I 
won't try it. New ones from SuSE come up on 
ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.0/kernel

Wilhelm

Re: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[chris.danx]

"Wilhelm Spickermann" <wilhelm.spickermann@spickermann-d.de> wrote in
message news:mailman.1022304362.15962.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org...

> > Hmm, now I'm wondering if it's possible to install SuSE with
> > another kernel instead of the one it's got, and get the
> > installer to work with it?
>
> I've never tried to replace a SuSE-Kernel by a normal one and I
> won't try it. New ones from SuSE come up on
> ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/8.0/kernel


Will keep checking, thanks.

Got to play with Linux today and have only had 2 problems, Terayon don't
seem to have produced a suitable driver for the USB cable modem but this was
anticipated (ethernet card needed) and mounting the floppy inside a
directory from a user account, or atleast that's what I think it wants to do
(it reported only root can do that!).  It's part of a set of build
instructions for serge robyns adaos package, and it probably just needs a
twiddling of an privelege to do, although whether it's safe to allow that is
unknown to me.  Building an OS was the whole reason for getting suse 8.0, so
the ease with which Serges' code could be built was a good measure as to how
well building of 'Nu' would be.  The build itself went nearly flawlessly, it
was the install script that failed, so it looks like it'll be easier.

Some of the positive points; the suse installation went very well with no
problems whatsoever.  (SuSE) Linux is quite impressive, all the software
tested runs except one or two games (graphics were excellent on those games
that did work), and lots of variety.  Boot time is roughly the same or
slighly longer than win2k and on first impressions they compare quite
favourably with each other.  Seems like it was worth ditching the raid
controller after all.


what is 'su'?  Typing a line in for the above mentioned install script,
gives a password prompt with 'su' (seems to be the root password, the user
password failed and brain was off!), but with 'sh' it gives the above error.
Why is that?  Is 'su' an elevated 'sh'?  If so that might be the problem
with the install script.


Sorry I know this is offtopic and I thank you all for your patience,

Chris

Re: OT: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Wilhelm Spickermann]

--Am Sonntag, Mai 26, 2002 00:45:48 +0100 schrieb "chris.danx" 
<spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com>:

> what is 'su'?  Typing a line in for the above mentioned
> install script, gives a password prompt with 'su' (seems to be
> the root password, the user password failed and brain was
> off!), but with 'sh' it gives the above error. Why is that?
> Is 'su' an elevated 'sh'?  If so that might be the problem
> with the install script.

Thats correct. "su" starts a shell under a new user (and group). 
If the user name is not given, "root" will be used for that. Try 
"man su". No password will be required if root wants to become 
someone else.

Wilhelm

Re: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Preben Randhol]

On Sun, 26 May 2002 00:45:48 +0100, chris.danx wrote:
> 
> 
> what is 'su'?  Typing a line in for the above mentioned install script,
> gives a password prompt with 'su' (seems to be the root password, the user
> password failed and brain was off!), but with 'sh' it gives the above error.
> Why is that?  Is 'su' an elevated 'sh'?  If so that might be the problem
> with the install script.

On Windows 9X, ME, XP there is not such a clear distinction between root
(administrator) and the user. In Unix and Linux one have a super user
called root which has access to all files. You should never use this
account for your normal business. I mean you must create a user called
say chris and you log in as chris on your computer and run the
applications you want. You must not do this logged in as root. The
reason is that if you do something stupid like trying to delete /usr
when you are logged in as chris you will get an Access Denied, as root
it will be done and you cannot undo it.

But every time you need to install, update or remove some software you
need to do this as root. So to become root you type in a shell:
su
and then give the root password.
when you have done the updating you type exit (or hit Ctrl+d) and you
close the root session. 

   http://derisilab.ucsf.edu/UCSFLinuxSecurity.html

-- 
"Jeg tror nordmenn har glemt hvordan de tilbreder fisk. De er mest
 opptatt av firkantet fisk."
  --  Kristian Kristiansen, yrkesfisker, aftenposten.no 19/04/02

Re: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[David C. Hoos, Sr.]

----- Original Message -----
From: "chris.danx" <spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
To: <comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Sent: May 25, 2002 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)
<snip>

> what is 'su'?  Typing a line in for the above mentioned install script,
> gives a password prompt with 'su' (seems to be the root password, the user
> password failed and brain was off!), but with 'sh' it gives the above error.
> Why is that?  Is 'su' an elevated 'sh'?  If so that might be the problem
> with the install script.
As with most UNIX (or Linux) commands, you can find out what they do, and
their full syntax, using the 'man" (manual) command.  I.e., to find out
about 'su', type 'man su' (without the quotes).

Re: OT: SuSE, Raid (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Ingo Marks]

Wilhelm Spickermann wrote:

> I have to support what Ingo said. Try to copy a 7.3. (In our
> local linux user group mailing list, we have a "distribution
> war" from time to time and SuSE 8.0 was the first one where
> nothing happend because all SuSE fans stayed quiet.) If things
> continue to go in that direction, I will change to another
> distri -- and I've started using SuSE before they started
> numbering their distris. :-(

I think it is not a SuSE specific problem. I bet other distris (RedHat, 
Mandrake) have similar problems. SuSE provides the newest up-to-date Linux 
technology if you want to use it. They do a very good job and I don't make 
SuSE responsible for the bugs in KDE 3.0 or other software with minor 
number 0 (even Linux kernels, say 2.6.0). It is the same as with new car 
models: It is best to wait a bit until the little problems (in Germany we 
say "Kinderkrankheiten") are gone.

> Concerning the raid controller mainboard:
> 
> 1: have you tried http://www.promise.com/support/suse_eng.asp ?
> (I don't know anything about it, but if promise has an own linux
> driver for that board, it should be there.)

Several months ago I wanted to use a Fasttrak 100 (IDE with software Raid 
1) in a Linux box. There was no driver in the SuSE distribution, so I 
downloaded a beta driver from Fasttrak. It was very hard and tricky to 
install (because I needed a boot image with a fasttrak driver on it to 
install this driver :-) Ok, finally it worked. But after this experience I 
would recommend to use SuSE software RAID 1 in favor of Promise Software 
RAID 1 if you have a fast computer because it is much easier to install and 
easier to handle. Or use a real IDE RAID controller which you don't need 
any driver for.

Regards,
Ingo

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Adrian Hoe]

"chris.danx" <spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:<%9sH8.3292$GB4.495005@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com>...
> "Ingo Marks" <adv@region-nord.de> wrote in message
> news:aclfpe$kc3$03$1@news.t-online.com...
> >
> > I am a SuSE Linux user for long years. In my experience it is best to wait
> > for at least minor version 3. I tried 6.1 and worked for a long time with
> > 6.4. Later I tried Suse 7.0, 7.1, 7.2 and was not satisfied. Only 7.3 was
> > rock solid with good device support.
> 
> Thanks, I wish i'd have known that when I bought 8.0!
> 
> 
> > So if you really want to use SuSE 8 then you should wait at least for SuSE
> > 8.3.
> 
> Oh bugger it, where's the screwdriver???

Ah... I almost had order 8.0 but fortunately I had a crying baby to
attend to and then I forgot about it.

Undoubtedly, that's the problem with Linux. I believe things will get
better in the near future.
-- 
                                       -- Adrian Hoe
                                       -- http://adrianhoe.com

Re: [OT] Microsoft vs. Linux vs. ...

[Wes Groleau]

> Linux isn't quite ready for the other ppl who live here, the learning curve
> is still too steep, but maybe in the future I will consider it for more than
> developing my own OS (GNAT for NT is just too much of a pain for this,
> perhaps this will change with it's integration into the gcc toolchain).

That was my problem.  I wanted Unix, but
I needed something I could make easy to use
for the wife and kids without being a full-time
system administrator.  The solution: Mac OS 9 w/
MachTen and now Mac OS X.  Unix underneath for
me, easier to use than Windows for them.

-- 
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau

Re: [OT] Microsoft vs. Linux vs. ...

[Adrian Hoe]

Wes Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com> wrote in message news:<3CEE54B6.386CBCD5@despammed.com>...
> > Linux isn't quite ready for the other ppl who live here, the learning curve
> > is still too steep, but maybe in the future I will consider it for more than
> > developing my own OS (GNAT for NT is just too much of a pain for this,
> > perhaps this will change with it's integration into the gcc toolchain).
> 
> That was my problem.  I wanted Unix, but
> I needed something I could make easy to use
> for the wife and kids without being a full-time
> system administrator.  The solution: Mac OS 9 w/
> MachTen and now Mac OS X.  Unix underneath for
> me, easier to use than Windows for them.


Yeap, state-of-the-art Mac OS X! I like it. If Linux has such
user-friendliness, there goes Windows!

-- 
                                       -- Adrian Hoe
                                       -- http://adrianhoe.com

Re: [OT] Switching to Linux (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Michal Nowak]

On 2002-05-23 at 20:09 byhoe@greenlime.com wrote:

>Try Linux! You will fall in love with it. I once tried Linux
>(OpenLinux 1.2) and I did not quite like it. After a while of mingling
>around, I started to love it. I am an advance user nowaday!

Linux is becoming good option for wider part of community. It supports 
more and more devices and is easier to maintain. However, there
are still some configuration issues, which require more computer 
skills and knowledge than non-cs folk has. To force my TV card work
with S3 Savage 4 card I had to do some kernel tweaking (and it still
is a bit unstable). There is still too much black magic for a typical
user. Well, using Linux I may feel a bit like a wizard among "normal"
users :-). Hmm, I like this possibility to have whole system under 
control, where there are no "super-clever" creators which wants to
do everything for me. I'm still dual systems user (not exactly - 
two Linux installations + FreeBSD + Win 95), but the proportions
are changing towards Linux. Two years ago I was mostly on Win, but 
now it is Linux. I hope to switch to Linux/BSD in nearest future.
I may miss AdaGIDE, but maybe it will be possible to run it 
through Wine.

To cheer up a bit. Most people after taking some course of using 
MS Windows&Co. put in their resumes point: "Skill in using a computer",
where it should be "Skill in using MS Word & Excel under MS Windows".
One day, when I was away, a neighbor of mine asked my Mother, if he
can print something urgent on my PC. She let him in, he turned on
the PC, and Linux booted up. She told me then, that after seeing 
all startup messages and landing in console mode he panicked a bit
and resigned from his urgent printout...

  Mike

"In the world of machines, virtual machines,
dominated by software ...
                  ... a new culture is born"

Re: [OT] Switching to Linux (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Preben Randhol]

On Sat, 25 May 2002 23:38:14 +0200, Michal Nowak wrote:
> 
> Linux is becoming good option for wider part of community. It supports 
> more and more devices and is easier to maintain. However, there
> are still some configuration issues, which require more computer 
> skills and knowledge than non-cs folk has. To force my TV card work
> with S3 Savage 4 card I had to do some kernel tweaking (and it still
> is a bit unstable). There is still too much black magic for a typical
> user. Well, using Linux I may feel a bit like a wizard among "normal"
> users :-). Hmm, I like this possibility to have whole system under 

The point is that the Linux developers have to figure out for themselves
how a device works unless the company developing this device wants to
share their documentation. Now device drivers are made for Windows by
the companies producing them so installing some brand new hardware can
be much easier on Windows.

When speaking about the ease of installation, on seem to forget that this
may not be so important. Example: my father uses Linux because of all
the Windows viruses and all the problems he got using Windows. I
installed Windows for him as he had no computer experience. And later I
installed Linux. All he has to concern himself with is to use the
computer for that he wants to do. He doesn't have to bother with the
underlaying drivers etc... And he has no problem with Linux compared to
Windows. Besides it is much easier for me to maintain his computer (now
that he has Linux) even if I reside 1000 km away from home.

Preben

Re: [OT] Switching to Linux (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Michal Nowak]

On 2002-05-26 at 09:37 Preben Randhol wrote:

>The point is that the Linux developers have to figure out for themselves
>how a device works unless the company developing this device wants to
>share their documentation. Now device drivers are made for Windows by
>the companies producing them so installing some brand new hardware can
>be much easier on Windows.

Yes, I know that. That is real pain for Linux users. I signed a petition
some months ago directed to hardware manufacturers. It was a request that
they notice growing Linux community and cooperate with Linux developers
to create device drivers. It was on http://www.libranet.com/petition.html
but it seems it is closed now. However Polish version still exists. 
I hope they succeeded in collecting enough signatures to be noticed.

>When speaking about the ease of installation, on seem to forget that this
>may not be so important. Example: my father uses Linux because of all
>the Windows viruses and all the problems he got using Windows. I
>installed Windows for him as he had no computer experience. And later I
>installed Linux. All he has to concern himself with is to use the
>computer for that he wants to do. He doesn't have to bother with the
>underlaying drivers etc... And he has no problem with Linux compared to
>Windows.

I do not claim that Linux is unusable for non-cs people, but there was
my observation. What I saw is, if they had no "click-click-do-all-for-me
-graphical-wizard", they fell lost/are too lazy(?)/want more convenience
in using system. It reminds me some post we had on CLA concerning GUIs
- "click-click-do-all-for-me-graphical-environment". Well...

Cheers,
Mike

"In the world of machines, virtual machines,
dominated by software ...
                  ... a new culture is born"

Re: [OT] Switching to Linux (was: Microsoft takes on ACT)

[Adrian Hoe]

Michal Nowak wrote:

> On 2002-05-26 at 09:37 Preben Randhol wrote:
> 
> 
>>The point is that the Linux developers have to figure out for themselves
>>how a device works unless the company developing this device wants to
>>share their documentation. Now device drivers are made for Windows by
>>the companies producing them so installing some brand new hardware can
>>be much easier on Windows.
>>
> 
> Yes, I know that. That is real pain for Linux users. I signed a petition
> some months ago directed to hardware manufacturers. It was a request that
> they notice growing Linux community and cooperate with Linux developers
> to create device drivers. It was on http://www.libranet.com/petition.html
> but it seems it is closed now. However Polish version still exists. 
> I hope they succeeded in collecting enough signatures to be noticed.
> 
> 
>>When speaking about the ease of installation, on seem to forget that this
>>may not be so important. Example: my father uses Linux because of all
>>the Windows viruses and all the problems he got using Windows. I
>>installed Windows for him as he had no computer experience. And later I
>>installed Linux. All he has to concern himself with is to use the
>>computer for that he wants to do. He doesn't have to bother with the
>>underlaying drivers etc... And he has no problem with Linux compared to
>>Windows.
>>
> 
> I do not claim that Linux is unusable for non-cs people, but there was
> my observation. What I saw is, if they had no "click-click-do-all-for-me
> -graphical-wizard", they fell lost/are too lazy(?)/want more convenience
> in using system. It reminds me some post we had on CLA concerning GUIs
> - "click-click-do-all-for-me-graphical-environment". Well...
> 
> Cheers,
> Mike
> 
> "In the world of machines, virtual machines,
> dominated by software ...
>                   ... a new culture is born"
> 
> 

I believe with UnitedLinux, things will get smoother... :-)

-- 
Remove *nospam* to email.              -- Adrian Hoe
                                        -- http://adrianhoe.com

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[sk]

Hi,

>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60050-2002May22.html
>...
>Microsoft also said open-source software is inherently less 
>secure because the code is available for the world to examine 
>for flaws, making it possible for hackers or criminals
>to exploit them. Proprietary software, the company argued, 
>is more secure because of its closed nature.
>

Yet every day, it seems, people are finding holes in the
security by obscurity of "closed nature" software ...

... and there are statements in the GPL which make it 
clear that one is only obliged to release the source if
one releases the application. 

Does a "smart-bomb" hitting the target constitute a
release of the application ? 

If so, ask the recipients to mail and request a copy :-)

-- 
-------------------------------------
-- Merge vertically for real address
-------------------------------------
s n p @ t . o
 k i e k c c m
-------------------------------------

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Michael Bode]

sk <noname@myob.com> writes:

> Does a "smart-bomb" hitting the target constitute a
> release of the application ? 
> 
> If so, ask the recipients to mail and request a copy :-)

Why wouldn't you want to include the source with the binary in that
case?

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Robert Dewar]

sk <noname@myob.com> wrote in message news:<mailman.1022183821.28428.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>...

> Does a "smart-bomb" hitting the target constitute a
> release of the application ? 

I know there is an implicit smiley here, but still, just
to answer this, of course such delivery systems would almost never be
under the GPL so this is an (entertaining)
rhetorical question

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Florian Weimer]

dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:

>> Does a "smart-bomb" hitting the target constitute a
>> release of the application ? 
>
> I know there is an implicit smiley here, but still, just
> to answer this, of course such delivery systems would almost never be
> under the GPL so this is an (entertaining)
> rhetorical question

But they might contain technology which cannot otherwise legally
exported from the US: "A launch vehicle or payload shall not, by the
launching of such vehicle, be considered export for the purposes of
this subchapter." (ITAR, 120.17)

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Preben Randhol]

On Sun, 26 May 2002 22:19:04 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
> But they might contain technology which cannot otherwise legally
> exported from the US: "A launch vehicle or payload shall not, by the
> launching of such vehicle, be considered export for the purposes of
> this subchapter." (ITAR, 120.17)

So one can export some payload through the ISS? ;-)

Preben

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Florian Weimer]

Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> writes:

> On Sun, 26 May 2002 22:19:04 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> 
>> But they might contain technology which cannot otherwise legally
>> exported from the US: "A launch vehicle or payload shall not, by the
>> launching of such vehicle, be considered export for the purposes of
>> this subchapter." (ITAR, 120.17)
>
> So one can export some payload through the ISS? ;-)

Probably, but there are other restrictions which can prevent American
citizens from distributing the information legally from there.

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Florian Weimer]

Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> writes:

> On Sun, 26 May 2002 22:19:04 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> 
>> But they might contain technology which cannot otherwise legally
>> exported from the US: "A launch vehicle or payload shall not, by the
>> launching of such vehicle, be considered export for the purposes of
>> this subchapter." (ITAR, 120.17)
>
> So one can export some payload through the ISS? ;-)

Probably, but there are other restrictions which can prevent American
citizens from disseminating the information legally from there.

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Robert I. Eachus]

dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:
> I know there is an implicit smiley here, but still, just
> to answer this, of course such delivery systems would almost never be
> under the GPL so this is an (entertaining)
> rhetorical question


Florian Weimer wrote:
> But they might contain technology which cannot otherwise legally
> exported from the US: "A launch vehicle or payload shall not, by the
> launching of such vehicle, be considered export for the purposes of
> this subchapter." (ITAR, 120.17)


Gee, this gets very entertaining.  So if some Space Shuttle flight 
carries encryption software to the International Space Station, that is 
explicitly not export.  If an non-US Cosmonaut returns to Russia with 
that software, is it already outside of ITAR rules?  I think so.  Just 
don't be the astronaut that hands the software to the cosmonaut.  That 
could lead to the sort of good legal case that results in bad law.

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Preben Randhol]

On Mon, 27 May 2002 23:37:08 GMT, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
> 
> Gee, this gets very entertaining.  So if some Space Shuttle flight 
> carries encryption software to the International Space Station, that is 
> explicitly not export.  If an non-US Cosmonaut returns to Russia with 
> that software, is it already outside of ITAR rules?  I think so.  Just 
> don't be the astronaut that hands the software to the cosmonaut.  That 
> could lead to the sort of good legal case that results in bad law.
> 

Whose law apply on the ISS?

Preben

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Marin David Condic]

It could actually be an important question. Suppose there is GPL'ed code in
a consumer electronic device? Does the GPL require delivery of the source
code along with the device? Does it simply require that it be obtainable in
some manner should the consumer want it? Or would you not have to deliver it
at all?

The answer to the "Smart Bomb" side is "Well, the folks who accept delivery
of it are free to come pick up the source code if they want it..." :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
news:5ee5b646.0205251441.2e9489fb@posting.google.com...
> sk <noname@myob.com> wrote in message
news:<mailman.1022183821.28428.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>...
>
> > Does a "smart-bomb" hitting the target constitute a
> > release of the application ?
>
> I know there is an implicit smiley here, but still, just
> to answer this, of course such delivery systems would almost never be
> under the GPL so this is an (entertaining)
> rhetorical question

Re: Microsoft takes on ACT

[Dewi Daniels]

I'm sure Robert Dewar will be surprised to learn that ACT is a "cancer" and
un-American. GNAT customers will be even more surprised to learn that GNAT
is insecure and bug-ridden. I'd never have known any of this unless
Microsoft had pointed it out to me :)