Linux-Advocacy Digest #235, Volume #32 Fri, 16 Feb 01 12:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Interesting article ("David Brown")
Re: Joke of the day - from Microsoft (Craig Kelley)
Re: Andrew Leonard: "Life, liberty and the pursuit of free software" (Craig Kelley)
Re: DOS2Unix ("Karel Jansens")
Re: I will give MS credit for one thing (Peter Hayes)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:45:38 +0100
I guess I've learned a bit more history from this thread. However things
happened, it is certainly a sad story.
Amphetamine Bob wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>David Brown wrote:
>>
>> IBM has a solid record of turning out brilliant technology and hopeless
>> marketing.
>
>Actually, IBM does not do very much marketing of their products at
>all. OS/2 was an exception.
>
> OS/2 Warp was effectively destroyed by the combined effort of MS
>> marketting genius and IBM's total failure to deal with competing
interests
>> (on the one hand, it wanted to sell OS/2, and on the other hand, it
wanted
>> to keep its low price on Win311 from MS - MS told them to kill OS/2 or
pay
>> the full shelf price for Win311, and stupidly IBM fell for it).
>
>No, wrong. At the time, OS/2 and Windows were available on all IBM
>PC's, or you could have both on the same PC. At around the time you
>are referring to (late 94-early 95) OS/2 was starting to go beyond its
>intended market as a business OS and filtering into the home user
>market. IBM was just starting to market to the home user. The user
>base was actually exploding. I think there were something like 18
>million users (many of them home users) around this time. During the
>same period that you call "failure", OS/2 was actually the top selling
>OS in the US (April 1995)! At this time the awful whores at ZDNet
>conveniently decided to leave their sales chart out of PC Magazine.
>
>And a large media war against OS/2 was unleashed. Although there were
>some pro-OS/2 pieces, most of the computer press and even the
>mainstream media was behind MS and strongly anti-IBM and -OS/2. Also,
>the "IBM is killing OS/2" articles really started exploding again.
>These pieces often take off when something positive happens with
>OS/2. In fact, in summer 1995, the New York Times quoted unnamed IBM
>officials as saying that OS/2 would be killed soon.
>
>I have read a number of these articles on the Net. It is really a
>strange period. All these pieces by computer gurus about how
>wonderful Windows 3x was and how much they hated OS/2. Why? Hard to
>install. True. Harder to find some drivers. True but only as bad as
>Linux now. There was the occasional DOS or Win 3x app that had a hard
>time running. Also true. And lastly, they were all just so used to
>Windows and DOS. Newbies were warned in no uncertain terms to stick
>with Windows.
>
>I have gone back to read the hype regarding the launch of Win 95
>also. Win 95 would seem to be one of the most fantastic, incredible,
>out-of-this-world rockin' OS's ever! It was just as good as OS/2, if
>not better! The multitasking was amazing! It was rock-solid
>stable!!!! I know it seems hard to believe but the press was filled
>with stuff like that. There were also a lot of OS comparisons where
>OS/2 lost out due to lack of native apps, while Win 3x and DOS had
>tons. Never mind that OS/2 could run almost all of those Win and DOS
>native apps better than the former! This was never mentioned.
>
>The buildup for the Windows 95 release was a media extravaganza.
>There were dorks waiting outside computer stores at 3 AM to be the
>first sucker to fall for Windows 95. TV cameras, reporters, the whole
>MS media machine...
>
>Yet, in spite of all this, OS/2 continued to do well. In fact, in
>late 95, a number of large familiar OEM's were anxious to preload it.
>IBM went around to all the OEM's trying to get it preinstalled. MS
>threats came thru and no one would preinstall it. ISV's were told in
>no uncertain terms that if they produced an OS/2 version, there would
>be no Windows version. A number, including Corel, bowed. IBM worked
>their butt off trying to get ISV's to write apps for it and for HW
>vendors to write drivers. The HW vendors were pressured, as they have
>been for a long time, to write only for Windows. There are penalties
>for those who support other OS's. IBM spent millions marketing OS/2
>(I think $14 million) and they actually made a lot of money off it in
>this period.
>
>Several things came to a head. IBM was threatened with having no
>relationship with MS, with having to pay retail for Windows, etc. IBM
>stood up for OS/2, which MS ordered them to kill. And IBM got screwed
>royally. After a couple of months, IBM backed down and was forced to
>sign an anticompetitive agreement to not promote, market, etc. OS/2 in
>any way whatsoever. This agreement remains in effect to this very
>day.
>
>This decision has been criticized but paying retail for Windows would
>have destroyed the hardware division, which is a huge OEM. Perhaps
>more importantly, it would have killed IBM in the middleware market
>(Notes) where they make even more money. At this time, MS locked in
>the Win32 API in court. Although IBM quickly mirrored it on OS/2 , it
>was never released and to this day runs only at IBM due to legal
>reasons. MS was preparing to spend $500 million marketing Win 95.
>The writing was on the wall. OS/2 had to be sacrificed, and that is
>what happened. It was an intelligent business decision.
>
>This is the real story of the "failure" of OS/2. I might also add
>that for a failure, it has been a pretty profitable one.
>>
>> Warp 3 was a brilliant piece of software - in fact, most of its major
>> problems or limitations (such as the single input queue)
>
>If an app is written to take SIQ into account, it is no problem. It
>causes 1% of Warp crashes. IBM won't get rid of it because doing so
>would break many legacy apps. IBM is not into forcing you to upgrade
>your SW and HW every year like MS. If you want to run old stuff, that
>is fine with them and they will support you.
>--
>Bob - flipping the bird at 550 MHZ :). Wheeeeee! ;)
>Are you sure you REALLY want to read this with Netscape?
>[ ] YES Go to the Microsoft site and download Internet Explorer
>[ ] NO Go to the Microsoft site and download Internet Explorer
>[ ] LOCK UP Crash Windows and soft reboot
>[ ] BSOD Crash Windows and hard reboot
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Joke of the day - from Microsoft
Date: 16 Feb 2001 08:53:09 -0700
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lloyd Llewellyn wrote:
> >
> > > ``Free software is evil'' sez Microsoft.
> > >
> > > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4833927.html?tag=mn_hd
> >
> > Excuse me, is there anyone out there who thinks this is *funny*?
> >
> > Microsoft trying to get the government to view open source software as a
> > threat the the American way?
> >
> > Gee, I just can't stop laughing.
>
> If I thought for a moment that our elected officials would let something as
> important as common sense keep them from accepting "educational" contributions
> from Microsoft, I would allow myself to laugh.
>
> Unfortunately, GW (idiot son of a bad president) proves that our entire system
> is for sale. Fix a few elections, buy a few people, appoint Ashcroft, it is a
> sad period in my counties history. I think we have hit rock bottom,
> unfortunately, they are looking for shovels.
At least he didn't take multi-million dollar contributions in exchange
for a presidential pardon.
By the way, what are your SAT scores? We can compare them to GW's and
see how much of an idiot you are.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Andrew Leonard: "Life, liberty and the pursuit of free software"
Date: 16 Feb 2001 09:06:41 -0700
"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2001/02/15/unamerican/index.html
>
> I knew Andrew would write about this ;-)
That is priceless. DIY has always been one of my favorite
Americanisms, and the free software movement is a great DIY project to
be involved in.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DOS2Unix
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:13:07 -0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Karel Jansens wrote:
>>
>> I don't know whether IBM had already "abandoned" OS/2 in 1995, seeing
>> as up to middle to end 1996 OS/2 was still a very strong contender to
>> Windows 95, with a healthy software development scene.
>>
>> In hindsight, the writing on the wall became quite apparent by early
>> '97.
> ==============================
>
> According to trial testimony, it was sacrificed on the evening of August
> 23, 1995 during negotiations with Microsoft on getting price for Windows
> 95, which was introduced the next day. Check out the testimony of the
> anti-trust trial.
>
I believe you allright. But IBM is a big dinosaur with extremely long
nerve pathways from the brain to the extremities. Divisions in IBM have
actively supported OS/2 after that infamous day, at first with outspoken
support from the Powers That Be, and later as a sort of guerilla
operating system task force (see if you can get Brad Barclay or Jim
Stuyck to talk about "them Good Ole Days" - quite literally in Jim's
case!).
I guess it was not meant to be... <sigh!>
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I will give MS credit for one thing
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:09:48 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:27:18 GMT, "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:96gloe$gpc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Todd wrote:
> > > > > One explanation, I guess, is that Windows ME probably has all kinds
> of
> > > > hacks
> > > > > to its scheduler to make it better for playing videos.
> > > >
> > > > Or maybe MS simply improved it. Haven't you seen the Linux kernel
> > source
> > > > code? Now THAT is a hack in itself.
> > >
> > > Beg to differ, I realize you are trolling, but the Linux kernel sources
> > are
> > > pretty good.
> >
> > Hmmm... I guess we have different coding standards. I really do think
> they
> > look like hacks. I am looking at the source from RedHat 7.0... the kernel
> > source should be the same across distributions...
I believe each distro has its unique kernel hacks. Mosix, for example,
requires you to use pristine code from kernel.org for this reason.
<...>
> > I have found that IE crashes *a lot* under 9x, but extremely rarely under
> > w2k - in fact, it doesn't crash on me at all under w2k.
> >
> > It is the crappy 9x OS.
>
> Why is it that you and your fellow wintrolls never, ever spoke that way
> about Win 9x while Microsoft was selling it?
>
> I can predict with perfect confidence that when MS moves completely to Win
> XP (or a successor) and stops shipping Win 2K, you and your chums will be
> all over the boards talking about how fantastic the new OS is and what a dog
> that old 2K was.
Remember Gates telling us all to move to W2K since NT4 had an uptime of
only 5 days?
What's good enough for Gates is good enough for the sock-puppets, as T-Max
would put it.
Peter
>
>
>
--
In the 19th century surveyors measured the height of Everest
from 500 miles away in India.
This cannot be done today. Everest is no longer visible from
the survey location due to increased atmospheric pollution.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:41:26 GMT
Said chrisv in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:41:55 GMT;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking) wrote:
>
>>We need more people to get fed up. Why do stores insist on knowing your name
>>and address when you pay cash anyways?
>
>Insist? They request, and I decline. Really, I'm always amazed when
>I see people cough-up their phone number or address when asked.
I believe it is every citizens responsibility to provide false
information in all such circumstances. I love it; it gives me a warm
glow knowing that I'm casually and without a thought causing their
database to be just that little bit more worthless.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:41:28 GMT
Said Bloody Viking in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 13 Feb 2001 03:39:40
>Mike Martinet ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>: In my experience, copy protection just doesn't work - either at home or
>: work. People blithely trade registration numbers and disks and software
>: with dongles gets replaced with applications that don't require keeping
>: track of a serial-port plug. I can't imagine home users being happy
>: about MS using their machines against them.
>
>The warez doods just simply find new ways to circumvent "copyright
>protection". One of the most pathetic things I saw so far was embeddedware for
>a robot. The app will work for 2 hours as a demo unless a thing with an EPROM
>is plugged into the printer fitting. Luckily for the company, the postal
>service does not attempt to reverse engineer the "key". But a private business
>with a decent ET would.
And could have some legal justification for doing so, to boot!
>The jig is up for copyright. No "protection" scheme has ever stopped a warez
>dood. The seeming low sales of Linux belies the fact it's freely and LEGALLY
>copied to numerous machines. Fire up a server with a distro, and put it on the
>server's filesystem. Copy the Linux all you want until the server's hard drive
>dies if you want.
Yes, "the jig is up for copyright" does have the ring of truth to it,
despite the recent Napster decision. Copy protection just doesn't make
sense; the cost of the putative 'pirated' copies (shared, none pirated)
is much much less than the combination of the decrease in functionality
(they backfire, and they prevent or discourage legal usage) and the
expense of incorporating the copy protection.
>As far as commercialware, I got fed up with prices YEARS ago, back when it was
>way less costly. Now, the prices are unreal. 1994, a C compiler, full version
>cost $70. Now, you get a broken "student" version for $300. Way back when,
>Office cost $200. Now, it's like $600.
Well, that's what happens with monopoly pricing. Me, I'm on the other
end; I would *LOVE* to find a package that's _worth_ $200. There's
little around that's really worth $70, though, TBH. And even the
miscellaneous programs and utilities, which should cost maybe $5, are
upwards of $40 (I know, I've paid for some of them, in a vain hope of
getting the computer to work like I want). Agent is something of an
acception; at least paying for it has more affect than just getting rid
of the banner ads!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
