HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: richk@grebyn.com (Richard Krehbiel)
Subject: Re: If things had been different... (was: FCC etc)
Organization: Grebyn Timesharing
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 04:36:12 GMT

In article <1ifck9INNmcm@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann) writes:

>   In article <16GWBFSJ@cc.swarthmore.edu>  
>   eoliver@ralph.cs.haverford.edu (Erik Oliver) writes:
>   > For example, formatting disks of my NeXT never bothers me
>   > because it occurs completely transparently, so I can continue
>   > being productive instead of paused.
>
>   But I'm only formatting disks a small portion of the time. What 
>   I do most of the time is work in a text editor.  Word for Windows
>   blows away FrameMaker (NeXT).  For much of what many of us
>   do, so-called  "real" multitasking (TM) is not needed.  Being
>   able to switch back and forth between Word, Excel, and FoxPro
>   is quite enough.

(Warning: serious flame-bait follows - I'm just in that .advocacy kind
of mood...)

As far as I'm concerned, I'm happy to let the huddled, ignorant masses
continue to suffer with what I consider inadequate multitasking, or
even - shudder - single-tasking DOS.  Only certain superior people,
like myself, have the mental capacity to be able to recognize and
benefit from "real" multi-tasking.  I'm one of these people who are
bothered that formatting a floppy forces them to stop working, and are
sophisticated enough to know that it's just not necessary.  I'm glad,
really, that most people are incapable of this kind of higher thought.
It makes me and my kind more valuable.

(No smilies.  I'm sick of this "most people don't need it" stuff.  I
need it, so I guess that makes me special.  I know enough about PCs to
know that there's no friggin' excuse for Windows to lock up the
machine to format a floppy.  I demand better.  Fortunately, OS/2
delivers, and so does Windows NT.)
-- 
Richard Krehbiel                                 richk@grebyn.com
OS/2 2.0 will do for me until AmigaDOS for the 386 comes along...
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Date: 11 Jan 93 22:49:37 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Reply-To: richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut)

In article <1993Jan03.202131.24166@Celestial.COM> ray@Celestial.COM (Ray Jones) writes:
>Phil, go look at the size of Building 8.  Now go inside and count the number
>of lawyers in there.

Last I knew, it's less than the number of clerical staff in Bldg. 8.

>(For those of you that do not live in Redmond, Building 8 use to be
>Corporate headquarters buildin, but now is used to house the legal staff.
>It is a vary large building.)

You seem to imply that Bldg. 8 houses nothing other than MSFT legal staff.
If so, the impression is entirely false.  A number of corporate services
are housed in Bldg. 8 (e.g. the Travel Desk and Shareholder Services) as
well as the Office of the President (i.e. Steve Ballmer, Mike Maples and
Frank Gaudette) and Bill Gate's office.

>>     If Microsoft rightly sues another company for copyright violation
>>or theft of intellectual property, that doesn't make them a bully.

>I have no problem when they "rightly" sue, but they have the POWER to bury
>anyone that gets in the way.

Well, at least you quoted the word "rightly".  Whether or not any
particular suit is "right" will, of course, depend upon one's perspective.
There is no objective way to say that such an action is "ethical".




-- 
Rick Schaut
UUCP:...{uunet | uw-beaver}!microsoft!richs

Microsoft doesn't speak for me, and I don't speak for Microsoft.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: craigdo@microsoft.com (Craig Dowell)
Subject: Re: The sin of MicroSoft
Date: 12 Jan 93 01:05:42 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1ippcdINNadq@tamsun.tamu.edu> bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs) writes:
[...]
>Joe, I think you have a misunderstanding here.  Time slicing !=
>pre-emptive.
[...]

Huh?  Well time slicing may not be equal to pre-emptive, but you certainly
need preemption to get time slicing.  How else is a thread/process switched
out at the end of its time slice?

-- Craig
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! :)
Date: 4 Jan 1993 15:07:01 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <1hvl3mINN1ss@network.ucsd.edu> mbk@gibbs.ucsd.edu (Matt  
Kennel) writes:
> There is only ONE operating system, created by ONE company, which  
can
> conceivably run MANY different applications.  (But that may be  
changing.)
> 
> It's to Microsoft's advantage to put more and more "applications"  
features
> in their operating systems, thereby precluding others from future  
competition
> in those areas.  (Unix vendors didn't do that since they have this
> "comittement" to the codex of Unix code from either Berkeley or  
AT&T)
> 
> Consider all the "multimedia extensions" and 'database features'.
> 

If this is bad, I guess that NeXT is in trouble.

Actually, though, any application can make use of the multimedia
extensions and so forth that Microsoft has put into Windows.
The interfaces are there for all to use.

> But that's not the real danger.  MS Applications can find about  
plans and
> request specific features that they need in the future that will  
best aid
> their business plans.  Everybody else has to wait and see what MS  
decides to
> dole out.

But why is this a danger, and how does it differ from what anyone
else is doing?  Do you mean the company shouldn't consider
its business plan when it decides what features to add to
Windows in the future?  Why not?  The business plan, after
all, is based to a large degree on projected sales, and thus
"what features should we add to better our business stance?" is
akin to "which features do the customers want, so that they'll
buy the new release?".

> Replace government committee with MS and that's a good example of  
what's
> starting to happen with application developers.  They know that  
there is
> NO place for the large profit-making mainstream applications  
outside
> Microsoft.

I doubt they "know" (or believe) this at all. On the contrary,
I'm sure that Bill Gates knows very well that WordPerfect for
Windows, Lotus for Windows, Quattro Pro for Windows, and so
forth are all endorsements of the Windows environment.  Windows
is selling so well because so many products are now available
for it, and Gates and Microsoft know this.

> 
> Consider the PenPoint computer.  Clearly enormously superior to  
anything
> mainstream (objectoriented OS, etc.) but it will be killed by
> Pen Windows.  (does it exist even?)
> 

So you are arguing that it is unfair of Microsoft to compte
with the PenPoint computer?  And why is it clearly
superior?  From a user's point of view, "works like products
that I'm all ready familiar with (such as Windows)" is what
constitutes "enromously superior."


--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Date: 4 Jan 1993 15:16:57 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Distribution: na
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <C07392.CyE@csulb.edu> sichermn@csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman)  
writes:
> 1.  As I understand it, MS wants the vendors to pay based upon  
total
> units sold, not the number of units sold with DOS or Windows on it.
> That sounds to me more like paying for the right to sell it than it
> does purchasing and reselling the product. That constitutes a very
> fine line between commerce and extortion.
> 

From what I understand of the situation, what Microsoft is
saying is: "You can pay us for each copy sold at $XX per copy.
However, if you'd rather, you can save yourself the paperwork
and the worry about tracking which machines have DOS/Windows
and which don't by simply paying us $YY (where YY is less
than XX) per machine you sell."  The vendors then look at
it. If they are putting Windows on 90% of the machines they
sell, they can save significant money (and some paper work) 
by simply putting Windows on every machine (since
machines_sold times YY is less that .9XX times machines_sold).

> 2.  MS's scenario virtually prevents the machine seller from  
bundling
> some other OS without taking a financial hit on the transaction. In
> effect, it is paying the vendor to not use the competitors product
> (because of the higher volumes and discounts associated with the
> agreement). That is a deliberate restraint of trade, not honest  
competition.
> 

Why?  See above.  If the overall cost to the vendor is less to
pay by machines sold than by machine, this isn't true at all.


--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  

Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3740 comp.os.os2.advocacy:11945
From: 177wardell@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: DEC bets the company on NT?  WRONG!
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:10:01 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

In article <L6e2wB2w165w@student.business.uwo.ca>, pkedrosk@student.business.uwo.ca (Paul S. Kedrosky) writes:
> x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:
> 
>> In article <1993Jan7.222909.20160@grebyn.com>, mfraioli@grebyn.com (Marc Frai
>> > In article <1993Jan7.063028.14772@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.ed
>> > [stuff from some magazine quoted by Brian deleted]
>> > [stuff by mfraioli about his experience at a DEC Alpha show deleted] 
>> [stuff by x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu about why Brian is wrong deleted]
> 
> Gee, you know sometimes I wonder why I bother to read other people's
> posts and don't just respond to the little snippets that are left of
> original postings by the time they've been quoted a few times; it
> looks like so much more fun. Just think of the great stuff you could
> come up with. 
> 
> Like the above little drama in real life. Where Brian Sturgill quotes
> from an industry publication and one of the denizens of comp.os.os2.advocacy,
> those paragons of virtuous behaviour, accuses him of being wrong . Huh? I
> mean, huh? Call me crazy, but I had thought that when you quoted
> someone else, scrupulously anyway, it was a little tricky to be wrong.
> The original author, maybe, but the person who quotes the stuff?
> 

	YOu  sure went out on a limb there by  implying that Brian
merely  quoted a publication and I (the "rightoues denizen") ripped on
Brian's quote.  Brian added his own opinion to the end of the quote and
that was what I ripped on him about.  



> p
> 
> 
>  __________________________________________________________________________
>      Paul S. Kedrosky              __/ "In a certain village in La Mancha,
>     pkedrosk@business.uwo.ca      __/ which I do not wish to name, there
>    University of Western Ontario __/ lived not long ago a gentleman..."
>   (519) 679-2111 x5174          __/  
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mfraioli@grebyn.com (Marc Fraioli)
Subject: Re: DEC bets the company on NT?  WRONG!
Organization: Grebyn Timesharing
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 18:07:56 GMT

In article <L6e2wB2w165w@student.business.uwo.ca> pkedrosk@student.business.uwo.ca (Paul S. Kedrosky) writes:
>x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:
>
>> In article <1993Jan7.222909.20160@grebyn.com>, mfraioli@grebyn.com (Marc Frai
>> > In article <1993Jan7.063028.14772@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.ed
>> > [stuff from some magazine quoted by Brian deleted]
>> > [stuff by mfraioli about his experience at a DEC Alpha show deleted] 
>> [stuff by x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu about why Brian is wrong deleted]
>
>Gee, you know sometimes I wonder why I bother to read other people's
>posts and don't just respond to the little snippets that are left of
>original postings by the time they've been quoted a few times; it
>looks like so much more fun. Just think of the great stuff you could
>come up with. 
>
>Like the above little drama in real life. Where Brian Sturgill quotes
>from an industry publication and one of the denizens of comp.os.os2.advocacy,
>those paragons of virtuous behaviour, accuses him of being wrong . Huh? I
>mean, huh? Call me crazy, but I had thought that when you quoted
>someone else, scrupulously anyway, it was a little tricky to be wrong.
>The original author, maybe, but the person who quotes the stuff?
>
 As Mr. Clapton said, "before you accuse me, take a look at yourself".
If you had read my actual post, and not just the pieces of it that have
been quoted, I never accused Brian of anything.  I simply said "this is
untrue".  Clearly Brian was reporting what he has read, and I was
commenting on what he read.  I never said anything about him, nor will I
now.  I appreciate his taking the time to post his tidbits.  I simply
disagreed with their content, and said so.  Period.

-- 
Marc Fraioli
mfraioli@grebyn.com	        	(So I'm a minimalist...)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 10:09:12 GMT

In article <1iilanINN610@shelley.u.washington.edu>, tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:
|> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
|> >is too large, too complex, and too inequitable.  Moreover, the laws on the
|> >books are both unjust and vaguly written--stuffed with Orwellian phrases like
|> >"unfair," "anticompetative" etc. which have no real meaning and therefore
|> >can be twisted into applying to about any sitation if you can afford enough
|> >twisty lawyers.
|> 
|> Out of curiosity, how would you write laws that do not have words like
|> "unfair" in them, or equivalent words?
|> 
|> --Tim Smith

The Constitution is an wonderful model of clear legal writing.

For example:

 13th Amendment
 Sect. 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a 
 punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly 
 convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place 
 subject to their jurisdiction. 
 Sect. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by 
 appropriate legislation. 


It doesn't say "unfair labor contracts will be invalid."  What is "fair?"
It says "Involuntary servitude shall not exist in the United States."

I'm sure we can all agree on a definition of "voluntary" :-)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: pkedrosk@student.business.uwo.ca (Paul S. Kedrosky)
Subject: Re: DEC bets the company on NT?  WRONG!
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 02:52:08 GMT

x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:

> In article <1993Jan7.222909.20160@grebyn.com>, mfraioli@grebyn.com (Marc Frai
> > In article <1993Jan7.063028.14772@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.ed
> > [stuff from some magazine quoted by Brian deleted]
> > [stuff by mfraioli about his experience at a DEC Alpha show deleted] 
> [stuff by x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu about why Brian is wrong deleted]

Gee, you know sometimes I wonder why I bother to read other people's
posts and don't just respond to the little snippets that are left of
original postings by the time they've been quoted a few times; it
looks like so much more fun. Just think of the great stuff you could
come up with. 

Like the above little drama in real life. Where Brian Sturgill quotes
from an industry publication and one of the denizens of comp.os.os2.advocacy,
those paragons of virtuous behaviour, accuses him of being wrong . Huh? I
mean, huh? Call me crazy, but I had thought that when you quoted
someone else, scrupulously anyway, it was a little tricky to be wrong.
The original author, maybe, but the person who quotes the stuff?

p


 __________________________________________________________________________
     Paul S. Kedrosky              __/ "In a certain village in La Mancha,
    pkedrosk@business.uwo.ca      __/ which I do not wish to name, there
   University of Western Ontario __/ lived not long ago a gentleman..."
  (519) 679-2111 x5174          __/  
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3767 comp.os.os2.advocacy:12028
From: jbrock@csfb1.fir.fbc.com (John Brock)
Subject: Re: Alpha Chip (was Re: DEC bets the company on NT?  WRONG!)
Reply-To: uunet!csfb1!jbrock
Organization: First Boston Corporation
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 02:58:40 GMT

In article <K8KWB1GY@cc.swarthmore.edu>, eoliver@ralph.cs.haverford.edu (Erik Oliver) writes:
|> One question about the alpha chip itself, I was under the impression
|> that the VAX chip offers certain hardware level services that VMS
|> depends upon, like restricted instructions and modes.  Does the ALPHA
|> chip support these things in hardware or have they re-done VMS to
|> support these things in software?
|> 
|> -Erik

They have something called PAL code, which as I remember is a sort of
loadable microcode (loaded from main memory, I believe!), which allows
you to configure the chip's response to interupts and such.  It gives
them a lot of flexibility as to what sort of operating system they want
to run.  I don't know what they give up for it, but people do seem
impressed.

You could probably get a more coherent answer in comp.sys.dec.

-- 
John Brock
uunet!csfb1!jbrock
jbrock@csfb1.fir.fbc.com
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3810 comp.os.os2.advocacy:12145
From: francis@ese.ogi.edu (Francis Moraes)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Win NT
Date: 12 Jan 93 21:44:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.48412
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute - Department of Env. Science and Eng.

rcmerrit@apgea.army.mil (Robert C. Merritt <rcmerrit>) writes:

>Now, I'm not ever going back to dos/windows a-la dos. I've been waiting for
>the perfect os for me and I have found it! (maybe a more perfect os with 2.1
>but I'll wait)

Wow, OS/2 advocacy... Are you sure you don't have any opinions on stock
prices or perhaps Bill Gates' personal hygiene? We don't want this
newsgroup to lose its focus. :)

Francis Moraes
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mfraioli@grebyn.com (Marc Fraioli)
Subject: Re: Tidbits 01/06/93
Organization: Grebyn Timesharing
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 18:02:12 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.014507.2017@msi.com> bill@west.msi.com writes:
>Matt Kennel (mbk@lyapunov.ucsd.edu) wrote:
>: What this means is that DEC won't allow the Rest of Us to buy cheap Alpha
>: machines and run UNIX.
>: 
>: The unforunate thing is that NT is not *so* much worse than UNIX that they'd
>: be really forced to do so, and instead the users will switch and put
>: up with it.
>
>I don't think Uniphiles will jump ship.  Not with Linux, 386BSD and other
>solutions on the market.  According to a report generated from Locus
>Computing Inc, NT doesn't even come close to replacing Unix.  NT will
>appeal to Windows 3.1 users with lots of CPU/RAM/Disk space to spare who
>hate either IBM or OS/2.
>
I agree with this assessment.  I know that many will complain that Linux
and 386BSD don't count because they require a fair amount of technical
savvy to use and maintain.  However, Unix has so far been largely the
domain of fairly technical users.  I think that NT and OS/2 will see
that it remains so, more or less, but I don't think that either will be
able to break into the technical areas where Unix has traditionally been
dominant.

-- 
Marc Fraioli
mfraioli@grebyn.com	        	(So I'm a minimalist...)
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3757 comp.os.os2.advocacy:11994
From: clemens@faui8a.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Clemens Beckstein)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: A radical idea
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 17:51:14 GMT
Organization: Regionales Rechenzentrum Erlangen
NNTP-Posting-Host: faui8a.informatik.uni-erlangen.de

helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:

>In article <1993Jan8.153322.888@aspentec.com>, tto@aspentec.com writes:
>|> I have a radical idea.  Let the federal government take over the rights
>|> of DOS-OS/2-NT by eminent domain and turn it over to a neutral organization
>|> like OSF.  Let this organization come up with a reasonable operating
>|> system that everyone can use.

>I whole heartedly agree Komrade tto@aspentec.com!!!  Read the GNU manifesto 
>(and the Communist manifesto, for that matter) for more thought along these 
>lines.  A software tax should be levied for the purpose of centrally funding
>innovations, to be administered by the "Centrally Planned Progressive Programming"
>(CPPP) organization.  

bull... you like McCarthy don't you?

>To insure that customers arn't confused by these lone-wolf programmer types 
>who think we're still living in the Wild West, we should outlaw and confiscate 
>all copies of MINIX, LINUX, BSD, etc. Yes, this would cause some inconvenience
>to some, but the good of the many always outweighs the good of the few, and
>in the long run we would have better software delivered more timely.

more bull...

>I know there are Libertarian skeptics in the audience who won't buy this--there's
>one in every crowd always trying to hold back progress.  Well you Libertarians
>out there hear this:  Goverment can produce GREAT software--ADA is far superior
>to any bastard hack like C or C++ that AT&T (a private industry) ever developed!
>And this new OS would be better than UNIX(tm)!!  Eat _that_ argument :-P

Now... I don't eat everything --- do you?

>|> I don't think the government or anyone outside the software industry
>|> realize how much the progress of software technology (and hence the whole
>|> computing area) has been thwarted by this confusion.  It is vital
>|> to the software industry as the HDTV standard is vital to the electronics
>|> industry.

>Indeed!!  We can point to many sucessful areas to where goverment-set standards
>have paved the way for progress.  Our goverment run school system is the envy 
>of all nations. So is our goverment--that's they told us in school!

and you believe it --- uaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!!!

>"One man    One goal  One mission,
> One heart  one soul  Just one solution!
> One flash  of light  Yeah! One God One vision.

> One flesh  one bone,
> one true religion,
> One voice  one hope,
> Wowowowo  gimme one vision!!!"
>	--"One Vision" by queen.

Nice... but whats this to do with the topic?
Do you want to suggest that Queens vision is yours?! Really?!

- Clemens
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy