From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:12:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: mksol.1992Aug19.201251.2536
Distribution: na
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <1992Aug18.181142.4854@nosc.mil> discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:

>In article <1992Aug18.162641.13575@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>
>>Well, my first computer HAD floppies, but let's look at that assertion
>>a minute.  By switching from tape to floppy, I got faster load times,
>>random access reads/writes, etc.  Now, what do I get from having a
>>CD-ROM that might be useful to me?  The ability to load the Windows/NT
>>SDK.  That's it.  It's not worth buying a CD-ROM drive for.
>>

>The ability to have a distribution media that costs only a buck to send.

That's an ability for Microsoft, not for me.

>The ability to be able to start the install of a large application
>(PS4 insurance data base, Unix, SDK, Kings Quest V, Wing Commander) without
>having to actually sit there and feed floppies.  

Frankly, that slight utility isn't worth my while to purchase a CD-ROM
for.  AFter all, I only install things once, usually.

>The ability to have access
>to large amounts of organized data (business lists, on-line manuals,
>encyclopedias, language references, libraries, clip art).  

For this, CD-ROM makes some sense.  But I don't do this and it has
nothing to do with software development.  I find online manuals to be
somewhat less than useful, by the way.

>The ability to
>acquire lots of shareware software for a song--without having to spend
>DAYS downloading via modem...

This, too, isn't a problem or a need I seem to have.  It would be a
handy application if one was running a BBS, though (which I'm not).

>Heck, the only drawback that I've found is that there is SO MUCH data
>that being able to use it one disk at a time is PAIN! (I am now considering
>purchasing a jukebox--or simply another CD-ROM drive to stick on my
>SCSI chain).

>You may not find it useful, but others (such as myself) do.  It has nothing
>to do with Microsoft (to be honest, only TWO of my Cd-ROMs are actually
>bearing the MPC label).  It's just a good, useful, technology; denying
>that it is simply because of preconceived bias and prejudices is lacking
>professionalism.

You need to pull your head out and read what was said.  First, no one
ever denied that CD-ROM had its uses.  In point of fact (remember
fact?), I explicitly mentioned things like large collections of
clipart as being a good use of CD-ROM.  I also said that anything that
is used FROM the CD-ROM (as opposed to using the CD merely as a
distribution medium for something that should be installed on a hard
drive) is probably a good use of the medium.  

So, that would seem to deal with the "denying that it [CD-ROM] is [a
good, useful technology]" part of that final caluse.  I quite simply
never did that, and your contention that I did is incorrect at best
and deliberate falsehood at worst.

Now then, let's look at the remainder of that clause.  The one that
characterizes me based on actions I never took in the first place.
First, the "simply because of preconceived bias and prejudices" part.
Please tell me just what my 'preconceived bias and prejudices' are
supposed to be, based on this thing you claim I did which never
happened.  Be explicit.

And that brings us to the "is lacking professionalism" part.  Next
time I'm out your way, I'll drop in and explain the libel and slander
laws to you in person.  Meanwhile, how long, pray tell, have YOU been
in the profession of developing software .  Just what, pray tell, do
you think gives you the right to lie about what I said, draw
irrelevent conclusions, accuse me of bias and prejudice, and then
impugn MY professionalism?

In other words, to keep it simple, just who in the fuck do you think
you are?

>>>Would you have us still living in the world of cassette tapes for data
>>>storage, where load times were measured in minutes for even the smallest
>>>applications.
>>
>>YOU CAN'T WRITE TO A FRIGGING CD-ROM!  Why is it that folks at
>>Microsoft don't seem to be able to understand that?  WHY WOULD I WANT
>>TO BUY A MASS STORAGE DEVICE THAT I CAN'T WRITE TO?
>>

>So what?  When was the last time you wrote over your BIOS ROM?  Still
>pretty useful, though, huh?  When was the last time you painted over
>a purchased painting?  Or erased and wrote over a book?  There are lots
>of applications for Read-only-media.  

One more time, for the reading impaired.  Nobody said there weren't
good applications for CD-ROM.  Now, please pull your head out into the
real world briefly and remember the thread.  Recall that everyone has
been 'defending' CD-ROM because it stores so much and is so cheap
COMPARED TO WRITABLE MEDIA and that they've been defending it based on
advancing technology from ONE WRITABLE MEDIA TO ANOTHER. 

Now the, let's try this one more time.  As a software developer, I
have little to no need for a mass storage medium that is READ ONLY.  I
don't do census data, desktop publishing, computer artwork, run a BBS,
or do any of those other things that CD-ROM makes sense for.  What I
do is develop software.  I DO NOT NEED A CD-ROM, EXCEPT THAT MICROSOFT
SEEMS TO THINK THAT ANYONE WHO THINKS IT MIGHT BE WORTH THEIR WHILE TO
TAKE A LOOK AT THE PRE-ALPHA OF WINDOWS/NT HAS TO HAVE ONE. 

I can't make it any simpler than that, and I can't make the letters
any bigger without sending you a graphics file.  Is it plain yet?

>I am quite certain that Microsoft understands the read-only nature of
>CD-ROM.  Perhaps, you should give them a little credit: the way I see it
>software is getting bigger and bigger--and we NEED some sort of
>mass-producable media to distribute the applications of tomorrow.  Whether
>it's CD or not, we'll discover in about ten years.  Microsoft is banking
>that it's CD-ROM.  I think they're right--given the strengths that the
>CD media has.

Yes, and exactly my point.  Perhaps 10 years from now it might make
sense to deliver only on CD-ROM.  PERHAPS.  Right now, it is sheer
arrogance on the part of Microsoft.  What percentage of the machines
sold to software developers have CD-ROMs on them?  I'm sitting in a
building full of people right now, and there isn't a single one in
sight. 

>>
>>This isn't an upgrade to a newer technology, and it is NOT cheaper for
>>me.  It might be much more convenient for YOU, but that's Microsoft's
>>problem, not mine.  I CANNOT WRITE TO A CD-ROM.  THEREFORE, THERE IS
>>NO REAL REASON TO BUY ONE EXCEPT FOR ARROGANT VENDORS WHO SEEM TO
>>THINK THEY CAN FORCE THEM ON PEOPLE.

>Why is it you keep lambasting Microsoft?  Are you mad at Corel for
>distributing their software on CD?  

No, but if that were the only way the distributed it and there wasn't
clipart involved, I would have a few words to say to them about it (if
their software was something that was useful in my professional
field).  I *AM* somewhat hacked off at Sun for doing away with tape
distribution as an option.

>Are you upset at Morningstar for
>distributing stock data and fund data on CD?  

Nope.  I don't need it, and this is another one of those applications
involving large quantities of data that are READ FROM THE CD-ROM (not
installed on the hard drive).

>Heck, are you mad at
>Phillips for DEVELOPING the technology in the first place?  

Nope.  Why should I care?  Like I said, they're handy for some things.
You quite clearly still don't even understand the issue.

>If you don't
>like the fact that some vendors choose to distribute their software in 
>the cheapest way possible (for them), then don't buy it.  Nobody's 
>forcing you to.

Quite right.  I shan't.  And I will make it plain why I don't.

>>
>>Do you get it yet?

Obviously you don't, since you don't even understand the basis for the
complaint, apparently.

>>

>Do you?

What I get is that you can't read, based on your 'response' to issues
that have nothing to do with what I was complaining about.



-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy