Linux-Advocacy Digest #321, Volume #26 Mon, 1 May 00 00:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Re: Advocay off the Net. (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Advocay off the Net. (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux from a Windows perspective (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux from a Windows perspective (JEDIDIAH)
Re: which OS is best? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Gates admits MS "engineers" suck? (Scott Babb)
Re: Opensource rumors (Microsoft Windows) (Loren Petrich)
Re: Factory pre-installed Linux. (Nick Ray)
Re: Factory pre-installed Linux. (Nick Ray)
Re: TYPING ERRORS (Loren Petrich)
Re: Awfulness of WordPerfect ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply-To: <btolder>
From: <btolder>
Subject: Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 17:51:45 -0700
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ei94p$mfs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> :> Office will be broken up into a separate company. This company will
> :> be free to port Office to Linux, BeOS, PalmOS etc. Office, together
> : ^^^^^^
> : Office on Palm ? That'd be interesting....
>
> A very slimmed-down, voice-driven office suite for a Palm-like device
> would be extremely useful, especially in congested urban areas.
> Imagine dictating status reports, juggling and prioritizing budget
> items, and placing today's grocery store order while stuck in traffic
> or waiting for the train. All the pieces are already in place, just
> waiting for someone to tie them all together.
All the pieces are in place? Maybe, except for a multi-threaded OS that
supports multimedia and can juggle multiple tasks running at once.
The Palm is so far from running anything worthwhile it isn't funny. I'm
amazed that Palm has foisted the exact same OS on the world for 5 years now
(with zero real changes) and they still charge huge amounts to do so. And
people talk about MS slowing the market. Geez
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Advocay off the Net.
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 02:02:50 GMT
On Sat, 29 Apr 2000 20:38:35 GMT, CAguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 29 Apr 2000 10:54:50 -0500, Ali Hamisheh-Bahar
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>I had CNN on this morning (I apologize in advance ;-), and noticed
>>that some calls/emails were taken in response to the news of M$'s
>>proposed breakup. Almost all were disapproving because they felt that
>>M$ is innovating and they could not understand what they'd gain with a
>>breakup.
>
>Has it occured to you that "Joe public" might actually like windows?
Probably not. It's highly unlikely that "Joe Public" ever had the
opportunity to make a fully informed decision. 'Being used to'
Windows now because it was the first thing ever forced down their
throats does not constitute 'liking' something.
>
>
>>To my mind, our job is to inform the _public_ now. Regardless of what
>>potential efficacy Government's action may have, this is the time for
>>us to put forth our argument. This is the time when the public is
>>listening.
>
>What argument is that? saying linux is more reliable then say win98
>may be true...but win98 is reliable enough for "Joe public". "Joe
That may or may not be true. However, clueing them in that EVERYTHING
else is MORE reliable than Win98 is a useful public service. They can
then finally begin to start thinking and acting like REAL consumers.
The net effect of this may only be more sales of NT5. However, that
would still likely be a vast improvement for many people.
[deletia]
>>experienced power, you don't know what you're missing. To that end, we
>>should call the call-in programs, and write to regular
>>newspapers. It's _public_ opinion that matters now ... and they're not
>>on this NG.
>
>Power in what sense? speed of applications? windows blows the doors
>off Linux in GUI speed using DirectX. I was reading the bug reports
You don't even know what you're talking about. You are cluelessly
mangling together two subsystems, one of which has several
alternatives for Linux. The other has performance PARITY with Linux.
>for mozilla...one of the bugs was determining why Linux rendering
>speed was so much slower then windows...the conclusion was that
>linux will always be slower then windows using the current Linux GUI
>system (gtk/x-server).
That's really funny.
Even using the same underlying graphics substrate (win32), Opera
blows the doors clean off of Netscape or Mozilla or IE for that
matter.
>
>"Joe public" needs a quantifiable reason to use Linux over Windows..
>dubious notions of reliability and power are not enough. "Joe public"
Yup. Novice consumers just LOVE it when their other devices
fall apart or fail in erratic ways.
>wants user friendly applications..which are in abundance on
>windows...most Linux apps are written by geeks for geeks...with no
>clue about usability.
You're confusing Apple with just about everyone else here.
Most Win32 apps are designed and coded by the same sorts of
geeks that write Linux applications. Whereas Windows is a
"headliner" at the User Interface Hall of Shame.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Advocay off the Net.
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 02:04:07 GMT
On 30 Apr 2000 04:08:48 GMT, David Steinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>CAguy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>: On 29 Apr 2000 10:54:50 -0500, Ali Hamisheh-Bahar
>: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: >I had CNN on this morning (I apologize in advance ;-), and noticed
>: >that some calls/emails were taken in response to the news of M$'s
>: >proposed breakup. Almost all were disapproving because they felt that
>: >M$ is innovating and they could not understand what they'd gain with a
>: >breakup.
>
>: Has it occured to you that "Joe public" might actually like windows?
>
>What does this have to do with a possible breakup of Microsoft? Who
>really believes that the breakup Microsoft immediately leads to the end of
>Windows and the immediate adoption of Linux by everybody?
>
>What it means is that those who would like to try to offer alternative
>operating systems or applications might actually have the ability to
>compete fairly.
>
>If Linux is not ready for "Joe Public" (I believe it's not and it might
>never be), then Joe can keep on using Windows and Office. The fact that
...or use Be, or use QNX or be freer to try a Macintosh.
>the two products would come from different companies doesn't immediately
>change Joe's experience. However, if it led to better competition and, in
>turn, better software from Microsoft and others, Joe would certainly
>benefit.
>
>I think there are many people who still use Windows that would find Linux
>more fun and more useful, and those are the people that we should be
>showing what they've been missing.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux from a Windows perspective
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 02:13:57 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 08:49:20 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Linux doesn't need to support museum pieces to be a 'serious
>> contender'. It's absurd to claim otherwise. ISA is on it's
>> deathbed.
>
>It does if it wants to gain a place in the market out there. Sure, we'd all
>love to dump ISA, but there are still enough h/w out there that uses it.
No it doesn't. Today you can get $800 systems that run at 600Mhz.
You can also get $300 300Mhz systems with only one ISA slot and
imbedded audio and modem. Meanwhile, the great ISA holdouts (namely
modems and soundcards) are now coming primarily in PCI varieties.
Furthermore, replacement cost for cruddy ISA devices are in the $30
and below neighborhood.
So, the motivations to cling onto ISA simply aren't there.
It's a dinosaur from an era that deserves to be gone.
If you're 'rich' enough to not need to pirate all of your Windows
software, you're 'rich' enough to replace those ISA relics if need
be if trying out Be, Solaris, Linux or FreeBSD.
>
>> You could take the $90 you wouldn't spend on the next M$ OS
>> upgrade and update your hardware. Then, you don't have to
>> worry about the OS cleaning up after the hardware as the
>> hardware would be genuinely PNP to begin with.
>
>Like I said, I got it to work. That's cheaper that $90 (or �40) in my book.
Certainly it would be nice not to have to pay anything. This means
that you should forego getting an 'official' AltOS package and
spend the money on de-crufting your hardware instead.
BTW, you might want to think of getting your parts grey market if
buying them in england means a nearly 100% markup.
>
>>>Ah yes. So I don't run X. What's the alternative? The multiple consoles
>>
>> I SAID KDE YOU LYING MORON, not X.
>
>Temper, temper. So I lumped X with KDE. I tried Gnome as well. I could try
YOU:"...oh, so I'm lying through my teeth..."
[deletia]
Some of us can throw enough frills on our desktop to bring your
museum piece to a grinding halt (whether it's running Windows,
Linux or Mebbe even Be) quite independent of KDE or Gnome.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux from a Windows perspective
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 02:15:25 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 08:51:25 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in
><8edjsj$god$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>KDE is a large system. If you have enough RAM, CPU speed, and an
>>efficient video card you may like it. Otherwise you might want
>>a minimalist window manager like blackbox. One choice you have
>>with X that you don't with MS Windows is to run the program on
>>one box and the display on another to take advantage of both
>>machine's equipment.
>
>KDE gets to be close to what Windows offers but it needs a bigger system to
>run it, that's my whole point which others appear to be missing.
That's your rather vexing LIE.
It does NOT infact require KDE to replace the functionality of
Windows. One can do so in Linux with a 32M 486 quite effectively.
>
>As for X being able to run on other machines, that's not terrible useful
>when you have a network of just one machine (or the other more powerful
>machine is running Windows 98 SE!).
There are plenty of X servers for Win32.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 02:19:17 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 14:58:43 GMT, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>On Sat, 29 Apr 2000 04:17:30 GMT, someone claiming to be Jim
>Richardson wrote:
>
>> Why does linux have no problems with ps files, but M$ does?
>
>Linux does have problems, without an app to do the translation. Such
>apps are also available for Windows, so the only benefit Linux has is
>the inclusion in the distro (assuming you have one that does)
...as opposed to having no alternate distros for Windows that
would assure such utilites are bundled in and contractual
language in the OEM agreements that allow Microsoft to effectively
scuttle any attempts by an OEM to fill that void.
...the flipside of the 'singular oppressively enforced OS standard'.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Scott Babb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gates admits MS "engineers" suck?
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 02:58:12 GMT
In article <Kn4P4.3840$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Scott Babb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8ehtfj$s96$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > First there's the revisionist view of history where Microsoft
> > "created" Windows and Office. I thought they just ripped off
> > Apple, Xerox, Digital Research, MIT, WordPerfectCorp, VisiCorp,
> > Lotus, etc. What they didn't copy they bought outright, like
> > Spyglass Mosaic (now known as Internet Explorer,) etc. It's
> > like saying Warren Buffet "created" all sorts of things simply
> > because he bought the companies that actually created those things.
>
> Whether or not ideas were originally formulated by others
> has no bearing on whether Microsoft "created" Windows or
> Office. Microsoft wrote the code, thus they created it.
In almost all cases Microsoft *didn't* write the code. Paul Allen
did the original Microsoft BASIC interpreter (wrote the interpreter,
not invented BASIC as some would have you believe) for the MITS
Altair 8800 back when microcomputers were in their infancy. Since
then, though, Microsoft has purchased most everything from
the original PC-DOS, up to Internet Explorer (ex-Spyglass Mosaic)
and Windows NT/2000 (ex-VMS.) I think they did write Microsoft Bob
from scratch, though.
>
> > The real gem in that quote, though, is the admission that
> > MicroSoft engineers aren't capable of doing what Apple, MIT, Corel,
> > Lotus, WordPerfectCorp, Linus Torvalds, Borland, StarDivision,
> > and even I have been able to do with relative ease: Write an OS
> > and the applications that run on that OS.
>
> You are misrepresenting the words. They are saying they
> never could have created Office or Windows as it is today,
> since Many of Windows featuers were originally written by
> the Office team (for instance, toolbars, gradient
> title bars, common controls, etc..)
I'm quoting the words. I'm definitely misrepresenting Gates'
meaning when he said them. I don't think I'm misrepresenting
the actual facts, though. The Office features that were duct-taped
into Windows are hardly technical innovations. Apple, Xerox, MIT,
et al had been doing that stuff for up to 10 years before it was
"innovated" by Microsoft.
>
> > No wonder it recently made news that some PC manufacturers are
> > so confident that Microsoft has finally shipped a reasonably stable
> > operating system (after over 15 years of trying) that they feel
> > they can now remove that button from the front of the PC that
> > grounds a pin on the CPU every time the OS locks up. Of course,
> > the owners of those PCs have discovered that quick access to the
> > power switch is essential now.
>
> Reset buttons have been in every computer ever created, just about.
> Including Apple.
>
My pre-Microsoft CP/M machines didn't have reset buttons. Nor
have any Sun workstations I've ever used (from the 3/50 to the
current UltraSPARC models.) There may have been a reset button
somewhere in the plumbing of the IBM 3090, but I never found it.
I don't remember one on my old VAXstation, either. I think that
the original MacIntosh had a key sequence to reset the machine,
but I don't remember a button that flushed the brains on the CPU.
A key sequence would mean that enough of the OS was still working
to interpret that key sequence and do an orderly reboot. Grounding
a pin on the CPU means that you've given up hope of the OS ever
doing anything useful again.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: Opensource rumors (Microsoft Windows)
Date: 1 May 2000 03:18:29 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>mlw wrote:
>> There are other issues as well, comments like these will be made public:
>> "/* This should break lotus 123 */"
>> "/* Hack to allow powerpoint to access private bitmaps */"
>> "/* This should break notes */"
>> "/* NSA paid big bucks to this back-door */"
>> "/* netscape engineers are weenies */"
>> "/* This is a big ugly hack, fix it in next version? */"
>Well, I think MS would look for these comments and remove them. ...
Netscape Navigator's code was reportedly similiarly sanitized, in
addition to being stripped of its licensed code.
But in an example better-known to me, Bungie's Marathon 2 source
code had some serial-number code and some library code removed
("cseries"), but the code was not otherwise sanitized, and there was some
profanity here and there, including some of the identifiers in the code.
One wonders if the removed comments had a similar approach to M$.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Ray)
Subject: Re: Factory pre-installed Linux.
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 22:44:36 GMT
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 08:25:19 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>OK, lets say we can get some OEM's to do a good job at factory
>pre-installation. The box arrives at the door, excited, happy user
>connects the color coded wires, and violla! It boots. What should that
>user see?
>
>What kind of startup screen? Presumably an initial startup program that
>creates a new user name and password? Music?
>
>Here is a list of "pre-configured" apps that must be setup and ready to
>function:
>
>Applix or StarOffice (Depending on the kind of deal you can get)
>Netscape, of course. With Shockwave and RealAudio
>KDE and/or Gnome (I prefer KDE)
kdm gives you the choice of desktop.
Nice fun feature.
>AcrobatReader
>Java
>Modem setup and configured.
>PPP dialup ready to go with modem and dhcp.
>Sound card setup and configured.
>Video setup and configured.
>Optional network, setup and configured.
>
>All the mime-types have to be configured.
>All the file types have to have icons.
>The user must be able to "click" on a file and start the correct
>application.
>It all should have the commercial quality fit and finish of a fully
>configured system.
>
>Are the KDE or GNOME program menus sufficient, or should the OEM
>rearrange them to a more logical order? The default menus I see are
>biased toward the Window manager, not necessarily ordered as an end user
>would like.
I've found both GNOME and KDE seem to have well-thought-out menu
structures.
>
>What are the best multimedia programs?
>
>Would anyone care if we mixed and matched Gnome and KDE applications?
>
Go ahead!
>Any suggestions?
>
SUSE comes with Apache and Htdig preset to search any and all documentation
that you might choose to copy onto your hard disk, including LDP stuff,
how-tos, man and info, SUSE support database articles and Linux Gazette stuff.
This is just about the best help system I've ever used. You type in a
typical search-engine-style query and you not only get ranked hits, but
some of them are formal and some are chatty - take your pick. So let's
add that feature to your wish-list.
[Compare with the useless "Paper Clip". Try getting Outlook's version to
tell you how to view message headers some time.]
Nick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Ray)
Subject: Re: Factory pre-installed Linux.
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 22:44:40 GMT
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 19:25:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:57:16 -0400, Joe Kiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>No, a person who is just starting out with PCs needs a consistent GUI.
>>Why should the arrows, dialog boxes, and menubars in Applix (Motif) look
>>nothing like the rest of the OS (QT/KDE)? I dunno if StarOffice QT or
>
> The look is irrelevant. It's the BEHAIVOR that matters.
> In this respect, NO current GUI toolkit goes far enough
> when it comes to enforcing standards. Each application
> (like say, winamp) is free to do whatever it likes. The
> fact that win32 might all look like each other doesn't
> mean sh*t.
It certainly doesn't! Encarta gratuitously uses strangely dingy menus
and its own look-and-feel.
(This may have changed - my copy is ancient.)
Nick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: TYPING ERRORS
Date: 1 May 2000 03:47:19 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First off, reading stuff by MK has finally revealed to me where
the more obnoxious Communists have gone off to -- they have become
equally obnoxious capitalism groupies.
> The standard typewriter keyboard is Exhibit A in the hottest new case
> against markets. But the evidence has been cooked.
Either/or absolutism -- because markets sometimes fail does not
mean that they always fail. And because markets sometimes succeed, they
are not always universally successful.
Electoral politics, for example, can be described as a kind of
market, with the market winners being those who win elections.
> ... But our concern here is with one
> such story that is put forward as part of a case against the effectiveness of
> free markets and individual choice. This story has consequences.
However, if people are interdependent, that interdependence
constrains their choices. I'd like to see Mr. MK use anything other than
metric units in Poland -- measuring people' height in inches and people's
weight in pounds -- instead of doing so in centimeters and kilograms.
> Why is the keyboard story receiving so much attention from such a
> variety of sources? The answer is that it is the centerpiece of a theory that
> argues that market winners will only by the sheerest of coincidences be the
> best of the available alternatives. ...
That's a straw theory, one which is undoubtedly a mirror image of
the authors' position.
> These ideas come to us from an academic literature concerned with "path
> dependence." ...
Path dependence is a painful reality. One would have to be a
member of the Dr. Pangloss Fan Club to deny its occurrence. And
unfortunately, some academic economists have acted like charter members
of that fan club.
> According to this body of theory, if, for example, DOS is the first
> operating system, then improvements such as the Macintosh will fail
> because consumers are so locked in to DOS that they will not make the
> switch to the better system (Rush Limbaugh falls for this one). The success
> of Intel-based computers, in this view, is a tragic piece of bad luck. To
> accept this view, of course, we need to ignore the fact that DOS was not the
> first operating system, that consumers did switch away from DOS when
> they moved to Windows, that the DOS system was an appropriate choice
> for many users given the hardware of the time, and that the Mac was far
> more expensive. Also, a switch to Mac required that we throw out a lot of
> DOS hardware, where the switch to Windows did not, something that is
> not an irrelevant social concern.
These critics of path dependence have provided an excellent
example of it. Claiming that Macintoshes did not get very far because of
prior investments in PC's and DOS is simply a claim that path dependence
happens.
> Most advocates of this random-selection view do not claim that
> everything has been pure chance, since that would be so easy to disprove.
> After all, how likely would it be that consecutive random draws would
> have increased our standard of living for so long with so few
> interruptions? ...
This shows that path dependence is only a partial limiter, and
not a complete limiter.
> This pessimism about the effectiveness of markets suggests a relative
> optimism about the potential for government action. ...
Another straw position.
Actually, government action can be beneficial. The US has three
incompatible cellphone communication protocols in common use, while Europe
has only one. This is because European government decided that they were
going to prefer only one, so that all cellphones can be compatible. In the
US, AFAIK, there has yet to be a big cellphone-protocol winner.
[claiming that Dvorak's superiority is based on only a few studies...]
Seems like another straw position.
[question as to why more people haven't switched...]
Dvorak computer keyboards are *not* widely sold, and there is the
whole question of relearning. Path dependence wins again.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Awfulness of WordPerfect
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 1 May 2000 03:54:48 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Adams) writes:
>In article <8ec4uf$g8k$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "Christopher Browne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Full Name would say:
>> > >On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 04:59:37 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > >wrote:
>> > >>You mean... what if Word Perfect was let back into the market place?
>> > >>
>> > >>The mere mention of such an idea makes for nightmares in Redmond...
>> > >
>> > >The DOS version of WP was quite a good package. The Windows version
>> > >was the worst mass produced software package I've ever seen.
>> >
>> > That demands the question:
>> > Was it The Worst because:
>> >
>> > a) It was badly designed? or
>> > b) It crashed incessantly?
>> >
>> > The design of version 5.2 certainly didn't seem _great_; the serious
>> > problem I saw with it was that it could only run short periods before
>> > crashing. Saving documents often made it crash, which was Rather
>> > A Problem.
>> >
>>
>> Plus it didn't follow any of the Windows UI standards. And it was
>> horrifically slow.
>>
>> > Questionable design I could readily blame on WPC.
>>
>> But, it seems, you prefer to blame Microsoft based on things you heard
>> around the campfire ?
>>
>> > But it was a well-known "factoid" at the time that Microsoft didn't
>> > consider Windows done 'til it made WordPerfect for Windows crash.
>>
>> Ah, is this like the "till Lotus won't run" "factoid" as well ?
>
>Chris; You should go and look up some of the old 'Dr. Dobbs Journals' from
>the late 80. They had one (or more) articles showing code from Windows
>that literally caused problems for several major players in the word
>processing and spread sheet world. MS was also quite nice in tech support
>telling people that to insure a program ran right on the OS, get Word or
>Excel, because coming from the same company, you knew they would work.
>
>> > That "fact" wasn't backed up by specific news out of Redmond, but was
>> > certainly consistent with the other things that MSFT was doing at the
>> > time, such as the "AARD" detection of DrDOS, and having Windows spit
>> > out error messages if the DOS it was run on didn't come from Microsoft
>> > (or IBM).
>>
>> Only in beta versions, then ?
>
>--
>Tim
Interesting factoid -- you can go to CompUSA today and purchase
Corel Office 2000 with Linux, and then load it into a folder on Win98.
I expect something similar could be made available for OS/2.
Word Perfect has its niche in the legal professions where it is
still more popular than Word. Today the fact that Corel
offers the value add of potential Linux use for it's products is
significantly enhancing the careers of Word Perfect Macro and
Paradox ObjectPal coders. BTW 40% of the Federal Government
uses Word Perfect.
Isn't that Awful? ;>)
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
