Only the brave/ignorant/rich jump on a new version of anything. I would never buy the first year of a new model car, for instance. I don't like being the guinea pig for anything, if I can help it! I do make exceptions, but never with Microsoft stuff!!!
Dennis McGrath -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MikeB Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 3:07 PM To: RBASE-L Mailing List Subject: [RBASE-L] - RE: None RBase Question! ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Bentley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "RBASE-L Mailing List" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 3:49 PM Subject: [RBASE-L] - RE: None RBase Question! > Mike, > > If you believe that load of BS. I have this bridge between > Manhattan and Brooklyn you can buy for a very low price. > > I came to the PC world via many years installing, programming, > and managing software packages in the IBM main frame world. IBM > upgrades to its operating systems(mainframe and mini) are > evolutionary they didn't go out an break a significant part of > existing software. Yes there were changes that affected > backward compatibility. There always is as that is the only way Actually most of the backward compatibility was preserved up thru Win2K AFAIK. The architecture was built around the NT Kernel, wrapped by the HAL (Hardware Access Layer) and the Executive Layer (please forgive if the nomenclature is not exactly right as I covered this stuff in a class about 10 years ago and haven't set eyes on it since). The original NT Kernel, as many here recall preserved the Actual MSDOS SubSystem as well as the OS/2 SubSystem, so there was an effort to preserve Backward Compatibility and the recent changes that seem to ignore all those issues is likely the thrust of the article. I have read in the barest of detail about Win7 from MS Releases to ZDNet and others that also lends credence to the modular approach mentioned in the article. If the modular approach is in fact the structure of the next iteration, I'm all for it, since the Win32 environment which nearly 100% of the Desktop applications today run against, including our beloved RBase. As far as believing anything, at my age I am a little bit jaded, tending to let things play out a bit till there is something substantive to get my head around. Kind of like the sign in Fox Mulders' office, "Trust NoOne" ..... > to grow/enhance the operating system. The opbect of the game is > to cause minimal disruption of you customers operation. > Microsoft never learned that lesson. Each major release involve > massive changes to the underling architecture rendering hardware > and software obsolete. This revolution instead of evolution > allows them to ingnore all of the past unfixed problems.
