Linux-Advocacy Digest #752, Volume #29 Thu, 19 Oct 00 21:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Ms employees begging for food (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Bruce Hoult)
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE (sfcybear)
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Why Linux is great. (mlw)
Re: Claire! post something! (Charlie Ebert)
RE: Why Linux is great. ("Idoia Sainz")
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux ("Scaramanga")
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE ("James E. Freedle II")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Matt Kennel)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:51:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Ketil Z Malde wrote:
>
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Revenues down 20% from hundreds of billions vs revenues up 270%
> > > from nothing doesn't really mean a whole heck of a lot.
> >
> > It could mean that the cash value of the software market is
> > shrinking. If free software becomes a (more and more) viable
> > alternative, it means that pure software companies will struggle to
> > keep their niches, and they'll eventually die off.
> And the niches will not be supported because
> the free software developers
> will have no reason to support those
> niches that they find "less than cool".
Actually, Niches are great. Niches have been the life's blood of
UNIX for years. And one of the reasons is because you know what
you're dealing with. When your success depends on supporting
a niche market, you can't afford to redesign your application every
two years simply because Microsoft came out with a new operating
system. Many ISVs and Niche market vendors are opting not to redesign
their code to exploit Windows 2000 features. They are pretty much
telling customers to live with the NT 4 implementation if they can.
In some cases, vendors are even telling customers NOT to upgrade
to Windows 2000 (since Microsoft may have altered DLLs).
> The thing with free software is
> that it is not market driven and
> thus is not resposive to the business
> user who votes with dollars to get
> what he wants.
Actually, very much the opposite. Again, go back to the UNIX
industry (which is heavily supported by Open Source BSD and GNU
software). In fact, most of the revenue for UNIX supporters comes
from creating custom applications using reliable "unglamourous"
building blocks like PERL and Apache in combination with "Glitzy"
applications like Oracle, DB/2, Sybase, MQSeries, and EJB.
IBM calls this combination "WebShere". BEA calls it "WebLogic".
Essentially, most of these packages are a powerful combination of
Open Source software used as "Glue" for high performance services
and middleware.
Then you back that up with support teams like Global Services
Consulting and Outsourcing.
> If the source is GPL'd then no one
> will be able to get VC to
> start a software company to make profits
> because every other geek on the
> planet can just take that software
> and make the same thing and undercut the
> first until the they are both free.
Again, whether we're talking Linux or traditional UNIX,
it's likely that you'll have a hybrid of Open Source
software and commercial software. Even if your competitor
outbids you, you may still end up selling him support for
your original software. And given the nature of the IT labor
market these days, I don't think you will be hurting for work.
Of course, if you can walk in with your "ready to run CD-ROM" and
deliver a fully functional product using canned Open Source modules,
that require a few hours of tuning, and can be maintained by people
who already know PERL or Java or Python, and Linux, then you have
a high profit "product". Essentially, this is what ASPs are.
The most successful ASPs will be able to quickly configure custom
systems using easily learned input from the user.
> So look at it this way -- voting by
> buying is the American way.
Absolutely! The Americans like to shop at a supermarket where
3-4 brands of each item sit on the shelves within a few feet of
each other. The American way would be to have Red Hat, Caldera,
SuSE, OS/X, and Windows 2000 all sitting on running computers that
could be taken for a "test drive" by potential customers so that
they can make an informed choice.
The "Soviet Way" is to have a "Depot" where you get your "allotment"
of "Soviet Products" (one brand, no alterates or substitutions),
and if the Commisary runs out (because part of the allocation was
diverted elsewhere, or into the black market) you get whatever is
left. Of course, since there is only one commisary, and only the
minimal number of clerks, you simply stand in line for the entire day,
the day assigned to you.
When you go into a CompUSA computer store and see 10 desktop
systems looking nearly identical in terms of operation,
with nothing to distinguish them apart but the plastic
on the case and monitor, it's not much of a choice. They
all run Windows "du jur" and they all look pretty much
the same with the possible exeption of the wallpaper in
the background.
> > OTOH companies
> > that are consumers of software are likely to benefit, and in
> > particular I'd expect an increased demand for consultants and
> > programmers.
>
> Sure. Reinvent the wheel every time.
Actually, you have to reinvent the wheel when the only wheel in
existence is copyrighted, trademarked, and protected by nondisclosure
agreements indended to have the very IDEA of the wheel protected by
"trade secret" laws.
It's OpenSource that lets you start with your choice of 8 different
types of wheel, along with reccomendations as to which is best for
which type of road, and then lets you move on to your choice of 5
different engines, 9 different upholstry types, 5 cab types, and
your choice of "economy", "luxury", "sporty", or "rugged" suspension
systems.
It will take about 2 hours to build your car, but you can either wait,
spend some time looking at which stereo you'd like to have installed,
and review which of the warrantee options you'd like, from the 50,000
major repair option (cheap but full of exclusions and waiting periods)
to the 200,000 mile full service renewable agreement where they pick up
the car, perform all maintainance, and have it back to your door before
you need the car, as often as needed and on a regular periodic basis.
The car analogy is good since most Windows users don't have much
experience with Linux and UNIX infrastructure.
Essentially, with Linux you have 1200 packages composed of roughly
80,000 components performing about 8,000 common functions. You
can then use preconfigured combinations (such as KDE or GNOME) or
you can use combinations (use KRN and Kmail on Enlightenment
desktop). With a little study, you can roll your own, or have
someone else tailor one for you.
> Depend on often undependable code
> when the OCC is watching (from my experience at a bank).
Fortunately, the components themselves are pretty well tested (many
have been production hardened for over 25 years). Unfortunately,
when you roll a custom application, you can't blame an uncaring
and unresponsive vendor who you know won't do anything but is
to loaded for legal battle to sue.
> Close all of your accountability doors when
> you are accused of an error.
Are you saying that you have successfully obtained accountability
for "Microsoft NDA-Ware"? I'm sure that anything can be negotiated,
but the default license pretty much says that all of their software
is pretty much useless and any practical application you may have
developed is simply a result of your own imagination. In fact,
if Microsoft deliberately renders your computer entirely useless,
the license prevents you from suing them. In fact, even criminal
negligence or vandalism by Microsoft is exempt.
Furthermore, unless you purchased the software from a retailer,
you are generally covered by a nondisclosure agreement that
prevents you from making any public statements that might
damage the Microsoft brand. This would include any bug report
or benchmark in which Microsoft is not depicted as the clear
winner. It takes some real creativity to create press releases
which appear to praise Microsoft while in fact pointing to glaring
deficiencies. The Microsoft lawyers are pretty sharp, but they
occaisionally let one through.
> I don't think so.
Certainly you can make whatever deal you can with whomever you choose.
Perhaps your bank is so powerful and influential that you can have
Microsoft indemnify you and guarantee all claims and damages. I
know of only one financial company that even comes close to having
that type of power and they don't have a bank in their infrastructure.
> > Invest in consultancy companies with
> > high technical competence,
> > system integrators that aren't too dependent
> > on particular software, and
> > hardware manufacturers instead.
Don't forget the companies that make heavy use of Open Source products.
If they can provide better service with a lower IT budget (as a
percentage of total revenues), it usually indicates that the company
is probably run by pretty sharp management that doesn't just "go
with the most heavily advertized".
> And get contracts that make them support
> all Open Source code they use and
> take full accountability for it.
Again, I suppose anything is negotiable. I know of very
few consulting firms, especially Microsoft focused consulting
firms who will even sign a fixed price contract, let alone a
meaningful service level agreement.
> Watch them all get sued out of existance.
Actually, it's even worse than that. If Microsoft decides
that a product or utility is "no longer strategic", you're
stuck. Even if it's a third party product, you are pretty
much at the mercy of the NDAs between Microsoft, the vendors,
and your company.
Conversely, if an Open Source focused consulting firm does a
really lousy job, and you start discussing that on usenet
newsgroups (in seeking assistance), it's very hard for the
vendor to prevent you from seeking alterate sources, and
very hard to prevent you from providing enough detail about
the problem to indicate who the service provider was.
When an Apache/Linux server goes down, it's news. This isn't
because the vendor makes so much noise, but because it happens
so rarely that people are very curious about the cause of the
failure.
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 50 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Bruce Hoult <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:01:47 +1300
In article <8snt82$qf2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Revenues down 20% from hundreds of billions vs revenues up 270%
> > from nothing doesn't really mean a whole heck of a lot.
>
> Absolutely correct. Microsoft is still the 500 pound Gorilla. To
> become equal, the combined revenue of Red Hat, SuSE, Caldera, Turbo
> Linux, and others (Red Hat has about 25% of the total Linux market),
> you'd have to take the current $72 million in license revenue and
> triple it almost 4 years in a row to achieve Microsoft's revenue.
Geez. That's not all that far from the realms of possibility. They
*are* tripling each year at the moment. And four years is a very short
time. And if it's six years instead of four Microsoft should *still* be
very worried.
-- Bruce
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:57:18 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Windows 2000 is rock solid. I have used it for almost half a year. Only
> had to reboot twice, both times due to conflict from newly installed
> hardware devices.
>
> Windows 2000 is stable, powerful, and easy to use. So does anyone see it
> as seriously challenging the relevance of pushing Linux to the desktop?
>
> Personally, I had been a Linux fan since Kernel version 1 with Slackware
> floppies downloaded over 28.8k modem. While in college I used Linux as
> my main workstation OS, with Win95/98 relegated to secondary role. But
> Win2k changed all of it. Right now, all the workstation frontends I use
> at home at work is win2k boxes with the headless Linux servers tucked
> away on a network link to do only number crunching and code comping.
>
> Any similar stories?
>
> Haoyu Meng
>
> Telpic Internet Solutions
Let's see, pay $$$$ for the OS, PAy $$$$ for an MS office.......
Or download a free OS that has every thing most people would need and is rock
solid. I'm using the new KDE that is due out on the 28th. It comes with an
Office suite that does MORE than I need. I can take a trip to Tahoe for the
money I saved! So I get a free trip to Tahoe every time a new version of NT
comes out!
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:14:14 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Sat, 14 Oct 2000 07:02:58 GMT
> <8s90f2$37u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Microsoft has such a small grip on the WEB you could functionally
> >> declare their bid for the market over.
> >>
> >> I think they just keep it open to say they have one.
> >
> >Two things happening here. Microsoft is getting a smaller and
smaller
> >share of the server market (but still growing slightly), but they are
> >targeting strategic servers, such as the front-end web server.
>
> A random question from the peanut gallery -- what the hell is
> a "front-end Web server"?
Most simply, the "front-end" Web server is the one that serves the
home page. Typically, it has all the "Glitz toys" but delegates nearly
everything else to other back-end servers. In some cases, it literally
passes users off to other Apache/UNIX or Apache/Linux servers using
links, msfriend.com will have links to linux.msfriend.com everywhere.
(whatever the hostnames).
In other cases, ISAPI will simply pass all CGI and ASP requests to
back-end servers that do the ugly work (server side includes, cgi
forms, asp composition, calculations, database accesses, and dynamic
content generation).
By targeting these servers, Microsoft appears to have a much larger
market share. The PR department than points out that 90% of the
fortune 500 companies use IIS according to the netcraft web server
survey.
> (Is this Microsoft Marketing speak again? :-) )
No. I probably made it up, and you were right to get it clarified :-)
> [snipped rest of the good news for Linux :-) ]
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
>
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 50 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great.
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:18:27 -0400
Idoia Sainz wrote:
>
> > Computing Skills:
> > Linux, like Windows will install with little or no computer skills for
> > "most" machines. Windows, like Linux will be more difficult if a driver
> > that is required for installation is not supported. At issue: Try
> > installing Windows 98SE with a VooDoo3 card, on that same machine
> > install a Haupague TV card. You must crawl around the web and find a FAQ
> > that indicates that the VooDoo3 does not support the older version of
> > DirectDraw that comes with the TV card, and that you have to acquire the
> > new version for it to run.
>
> > I find little difference between this process in Windows than the
> > equivalent in Linux. The only difference is the information is easier to
> > find for Linux because it is on public groups.
>
> > Time left to learn:
> > I have yet to see an "average" user not spend a day or two playing with
> > a new machine.
>
> I agree, but I think OS's if are to be used by a lot of people should
> tend
> to be easier to use, install and the so ... they should in fact be like they
> were
> not there at all, don't you agree ?
Sure, but, Windows' ain't it and that's what we are talking about.
>
> > BTW "too much facts" should be written as "Too many facts" (grammar),
>
> Okay, I accept the correction as English is not my native language, I
> hope
> you won't use it as any kind of argument like ... Windows users have not
> brain or the so.
Not me.
>
> > I disagree (here are some observations, they are factual) I sit across
> > from the IT guys. In a company of about 20 people, they have to
> > reinstall either MS Windows or MS Office (or both) about once a week
> > because word, excel, or other program crashes Windows, and people can't
> > do their work. I used to be a Windows developer, I still do some
> > consulting in that area, it isn't stable.
>
> I can't believe about installing every week and I honestly think you are
> not being honest at this point. Wouldn't you be able to last a Windows
> installation for more than a week ? I think yes ... if you give a pencil to
> a stupid he can kill some one.
Actually, it is every month or two per machine. It isn't the same
machine each time, and I am not making it up. It comes out to about once
a week someone's machine has to be re-installed. (They sort of have a
pool going ;-)
>
> > > Well, this depends a lot on what you are developing, for some things
> > > GNU/Linux would be fine for me, obviously not for developing Windows
> > > applications ... that like it or not, has the bigger market share
> nowadays.
>
> > This is the paradox, isn't it? There may be a market for SWB (shrink
> > wrapped boxes), but unless you have a specific type of company, you
> > can't make money doing it. Game geeks are lean mean companies. Run of
> > the mill software companies making $100 SWB are having real problems
> > these days. While Windows is a HUGE market, it is one that is full and
> > commodity driven, you either have to have something quite unique, or be
> > a behemoth like MS (and even that does not always help).
>
> Good argumentation, but still unproven, if so, why are there so many
> TV channels always selling you the same under different envelope ?
The advent of cable allows small TV channels to survive, metaphorically,
TV stations are more like web sites. Software comanies are more like
softdrink vendors.
I wouldn't say it my statement unproven at all, what is the number?
something like 90% of software companies go out of business the first
year.
>
> > I have a Windows box to test software on my desk. I am always rebooting
> > it. My Linux box has uptimes measured in months. The desktop does not
> > mean crap if you can't use the system. Which would you rather have, a
> > new corvette with no motor, or a Camaro that runs great?
>
> Not the case, Windows (even 98) is not as unusable, and you know.
Define unusable. IMHO I do not use Windows for anything other than a
test box. I honestly do not beleive that Windows is a usable platform,
and no one that depends on something like UNIX or Linux for any length
of time would.
>
> > NT Workstation and 2000 Pro are NOT rock solid. They are better than
> > Windows, but I assure you they are not nearly as stable as Linux. Just
> > the fact that the GUI operates in kernel space means it can't be as
> > stable.
>
> I know they are not as stable as Linux, I said for daily use switching on
> them every day. And what about GGI or framebuffer ? Or the Tux web
> server ? Aren't they kernel space ?
Yes, but I don't use them and I have that option, which you do not have
with NT/2K.
>
> > You have no right to think this. You have no knowledge about my motives.
> > I have no love for Microsoft, true, but you don't know why I have my
> > opinions, whether or not they are "blind" as you say. My opinions are
> > quite rational and arrived at from experience.
>
> Accepted correction.
>
> > All servers require knowledge. Point and puke, or text based, it makes
> > no difference. You need to know the technologies to ensure your server
> > is correct, regardless of the UI.
>
> Agree.
>
> > This is a common statement amongst Windows proponents, and as far as I
> > have seen false. No "average" windows user sets up their machine, it
> > either works out of the box (or from IT) or it goes back to be fixed.
>
> I do set up it.
Then, you are not an average computer user. You may think you are, but
the majority of users have trouble with the concept of a hard disk.
>
> > The "average" Windows user does not know or care about what they use.
> > Put a properly setup Linux box in front of them, and it will do
> > everything that they need.
>
> No, there are no consistency between applications, there are no universal
> copy and paste (big invention). People like a common interface (to the point
> is possible) in their applications ... which carries us to GNOME or KDE,
> why the success ? Consistency is one of the points, centralization is
> another
> and copy paste another. Why does GNOME documentation about objects
> point to OLE Microsoft specification ? Well, Windows has some nice
> things too.
Inconsistencies are a fact of life in the real world. People have fewer
problems understanding them than an appearence of stability and
uniformity which is false.
>
> > My cousin's highschool kids use his Linux box to do school reports
> > because the Windows box "loses their work." (It crashed on them twice in
> > two years, but they learned quickly.)
>
> Well, you pointed that servers needed knowledge, now I point that
> working with computers need backups ... I assure you that ext2
> filesystems and even ReiserFS ones has crashed here some times
> too, and if times>1 then backup needed for the case.
They were talking about crashes while using Word and publisher. A backup
would not have helped.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Claire! post something!
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:25:57 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <8sl0qg$keus9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Ingemar Lundin wrote in message ...
> > >this ng is beginning to sink to a new low
> > >(hard to break record indeed)
> > >
> >
> > Perhaps s/he is busy re-installing windows after another crash ;-)
> >
>
> Wednesday. The personalities are in court ordered counseling.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Microsoft revoked her contract.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Why Linux is great.
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:28:13 GMT
> Sure, but, Windows' ain't it and that's what we are talking about.
I think it tries more than Linux does ... I mean, it tries to make
the daily work easier (don't mean easier to learn, but to use), while
Linux tries to do it powerful ... the two worlds are getting nearer
each time, but starting from different points.
> Yes, but I don't use them and I have that option, which you do not have
> with NT/2K.
Wait and see ... if Linux requires desktop power, it will fall into
similar
mistakes that Windows fell.
> Then, you are not an average computer user. You may think you are, but
> the majority of users have trouble with the concept of a hard disk.
I know I am not. You're giving me the reason, if average user have
trouble
with that (and indeed many of them have) they won't want to use Linux
nowadays. Anything further than inserting a CD and clicking till a program
is running is too much for a lot of them ... and Linux is not ready for
that,
even Windows can't do it a lot of times.
> Inconsistencies are a fact of life in the real world. People have fewer
> problems understanding them than an appearence of stability and
> uniformity which is false.
Don't mix real world with computers interfaces.
> They were talking about crashes while using Word and publisher. A backup
> would not have helped.
Well if they save often and have a recently updated backup the lost work
can't be too much, can it ?
------------------------------
From: "Scaramanga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:32:37 +0000
> IceCap is not a firewall. It is a tool that allows central management of
> BlackIce. And like the Linonuts love to say when the weekly dirty laundry list
> appears from the various security groups "there are patches to plug the hole".
Black ice is not a fireweall either, it is an IDS with pretty rudimentary R-Box
as you would know if you follow your CIDF jargon etc..
--
// Scaramanga
www.geek-ware.co.uk - v0rsprung gEEk tEknEEQ
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:40:40 -0400
That is fine if you have all the time in the world to work with your
computer. I have a little time every night, and I want to get things done,
rather than spend months trying to figure out how to work with linux.
Besides the fact that it will not work with my hardware, and I am not going
to spend extra money on getting hardware that will work with Linux. Windows
2000 is rock solid, of course Linux is rock solid (it just sits there). I do
not know half of what is installed on Linux. At least I can get my homework
done in Windows. And Windows 2000 is perfect for home use. I switched from
Windows 98SE because of the limited resource heaps.
Linux may be ready for the desktop in some years, but until it is, it will
be only in VMWare.
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8so1or$u8n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Windows 2000 is rock solid. I have used it for almost half a year. Only
> > had to reboot twice, both times due to conflict from newly installed
> > hardware devices.
> >
> > Windows 2000 is stable, powerful, and easy to use. So does anyone see it
> > as seriously challenging the relevance of pushing Linux to the desktop?
> >
> > Personally, I had been a Linux fan since Kernel version 1 with Slackware
> > floppies downloaded over 28.8k modem. While in college I used Linux as
> > my main workstation OS, with Win95/98 relegated to secondary role. But
> > Win2k changed all of it. Right now, all the workstation frontends I use
> > at home at work is win2k boxes with the headless Linux servers tucked
> > away on a network link to do only number crunching and code comping.
> >
> > Any similar stories?
> >
> > Haoyu Meng
> >
> > Telpic Internet Solutions
>
>
> Let's see, pay $$$$ for the OS, PAy $$$$ for an MS office.......
>
>
> Or download a free OS that has every thing most people would need and is
rock
> solid. I'm using the new KDE that is due out on the 28th. It comes with an
> Office suite that does MORE than I need. I can take a trip to Tahoe for
the
> money I saved! So I get a free trip to Tahoe every time a new version of
NT
> comes out!
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:45:13 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:Yes. I have the courage enough to state that to my knowledge, Microsoft does
:not write its products so as to deliberately cripple competing companies'
:products. Its applications have no innate advantage over other applications
:on the same OS.
Do its programmers
1) know about future API's sooner than other non Microsoft programmers?
2) have a better record at getting the API's that they want included
in future versions of the operating system compared to non-Microsoft
programmers?
:
:Simon
:
:
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
