Hi,
>> OS/2 is another great operating system. Too bad it's mostly dead.
>Too bad Big Blue didn't know how to market it........
Ironically enough, big blue's decision to go with OS/2 is what caused
Microsoft to become big BIG time. For those of you who don't know: Microsoft
didn't think OS/2 was the right approach to a "new" OS, and then decided to
copy the Mac OS. So, while big blue and Apple were still busy battling one
another, they let the really big fish escape. Boy, will they regret this!
:)))
>Now all we have is Linux to keep Windblows straight.
Unfortunately yes, but then again, MS applications (and their OSes) are not
to be taken seriously anyways. Sure, they more or less work on one machine,
but as soon as you need to create serious applications, MS will typically
not exactly be your best choice. I think it's a very scary idea that NT can
also act as a server, as in my experience any serious business solution of
reasonable scale is much better implemented on Unix. Another example? Try
comparing MS SQL server with the real thing (i.e. Oracle) :)))
Then, to reply to a few of Dave's comments:
>I wonder why I have all of these OSs on my system each and every time I
>boot up! <g>
Well, I wasn't being overly serious when I wrote the initial reply. Of
course I'm aware of the fundamental differences between '98 and NT, so I
already figured that your job would somehow require you to have the
different versions handy.
>One of the aspects of my job is software design.
Same here, but I normally tend to work several months for the same client
(big applications) :)
Especially during this type of projects, I have learned to see the value of
Unix again. As stated above, I would not want to trust any mission critical
machine to MS-crap. Sure, on my workstation I use NT (the only MS-OS that
can be taken more or less seriously), but Exceed + Samba do wonders for
intertwining the MS toy stuff with the real stuff working under Unix :)
>As the Windows architecture is based upon a "shell" program loading
>specific sub-programs (DLLs) to actually do anything, any software written
>needs to take the DLLs into account
This was what I meant with "semi-OSes" (3.x, 95, 98) vs. full OSes (NT,
2000?) ;)
> -- and many of them are different between both different OSs (i.e. W98
>and NT)
Yes, NT is the proper approach to doing such an OS. Finally MS _really_ went
32-bit :).
3.x, 95 and 98 basically are all based on the same shell principle and
therefore are conceptually equally bad, although some of them seem to excel
more in levels of crappiness (do we hear someone saying '98 is the winner of
them all?!? ;) )...
>, but sometimes within a specific OS (i.e. different service releases or
>service packs - Win95 SR-1 and Win95 SR-2). While a program may run
>correctly under '95 or '98, it may not run under NT. Therefore I have to
>maintain all of the target OSs on every system I work on.
Yes, as stated above, I already figured this to have something to do with
your decision to keep the obviously inferior 98 along with NT and 2000 :)
>As I do much of my work from home (boxer shorts, iced tea & Bill Ackerman
>on the stereo are preferable to the cubicle-land that is Dell),
:)))
>Hell, I just got rid of Win3.1 and '95!
Hehehe, goobye and good riddance. Wow, that must be a real WINoverDOWSe, if
you have 5 of them installed simultaneaously :)))
>Regarding collecting, I still have the CPM86 package from 1981...
Hmmm, I think the oldest PC OS that can be found on my "collection" would be
MS-DOS 3.20, but it's been a long time since I was working under that one.
>now only if they'd make it in a titanium slipcase... <g>
Yep, then we could call it Windows 2000Ti ;)
>Regarding MS vs Linux, I addressed that issue in another post earlier
>today.
Oooops, I didn't read that one, but I think I can more or less guess what
you were getting at.
>The companies paying my outrageous rates haven't embraced Linux yet,
>therefore me neither too. <g>
With the emphasis on the word "yet". Let's hope soon they will...;)
Ciao,
Olafo
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|