HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mbk@lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Date: 5 Oct 92 00:45:23 GMT
Organization: Institute For Nonlinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: lyapunov.ucsd.edu
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
: jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone) writes:
: > I'd say it's somewhat more innovative, gutsy, and admirable to recognize
: > the importance of an obscure and nascent technology, license it, and
: > bet the family farm on making it available and affordable to the mass
: > market than it is to stay out of the game for five or more years and
: > wait and see whether such technology is even necessary.  Apple the former,
: > MS the latter.  Apple, essentially, did all of MS's prototyping and
: > market research, market priming, etc. etc. for them simply by bringing
: > the Mac to market.  Give me a break.  Do you really think Windows would
: > exist if the Mac didn't?  
: 
: Surprise!  Microsoft started development of Windows waaaay back in 1981,
: and announced it in October (?) of 1983, before the Macintosh was announced
: (but the Lisa was already on the market).  Windows 1.0 shipped in early
: 1985, WELL BEFORE Macintosh became a commercial success.

Announced in Oct 83, but shipped in early 85.  That counts as 1985.
Was Windows 1.0 superior to Lisa?  Hardly.  (tiled windows, right?)

So it took nine years, until MS had emulated a Mac to a sufficient degree,
to become successful.

Again.  Do you really think Windows would exist NOW if the Mac didn't?

Hey I don't think the mac is the nirvana of computers, but I'm pretty
disgusted that MS can't do better after many years, millions of dollars,
and without worrying about backwards compatibility.  I guess it's paying
the piper for DOS.

NT, now, one might think is innovative, but again, what does it do
that UNIX, a 70s technology OS, doesn't?

--
-Matt Kennel  		mbk@inls1.ucsd.edu
-Institute for Nonlinear Science, University of California, San Diego
-*** AD: Archive for nonlinear dynamics papers & programs: FTP to
-***     lyapunov.ucsd.edu, username "anonymous".
From: ruben@pollux (Ruben Robles Bermudez)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows UI guidelines?
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:33:29 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia

I think finally Microsoft published guidelines for the
user interface.  If you check the programmers FAQ the
name of the publication is listed there.

I was reading a magazine the other day and came through
an article about the lack of user interface guidelines
in the world of GUI's.  There are already guidelines
available for some the GUI's.  But right now MS is
working on the next Windows generation called Cairo
and this new system will sport a new interface.  Well
this article got the person who wrote it promising to
hear ideas on interfaces and submit them to MS and 
other big players like Borland, Lotus, and so.  I
want to hear about new and better ideas on interfaces
in general.  Lets say we want to make the real users
deciding what the future looks like and no people
no connected to the real world deciding that.


Ruben Robles
UGA CS
Athens, GA
From: tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: Waterloo Engineering Software
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992 20:22:47 GMT

jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone) writes:
> I'd say it's somewhat more innovative, gutsy, and admirable to recognize
> the importance of an obscure and nascent technology, license it, and
> bet the family farm on making it available and affordable to the mass
> market than it is to stay out of the game for five or more years and
> wait and see whether such technology is even necessary.  Apple the former,
> MS the latter.  Apple, essentially, did all of MS's prototyping and
> market research, market priming, etc. etc. for them simply by bringing
> the Mac to market.  Give me a break.  Do you really think Windows would
> exist if the Mac didn't?  

Surprise!  Microsoft started development of Windows waaaay back in 1981,
and announced it in October (?) of 1983, before the Macintosh was announced
(but the Lisa was already on the market).  Windows 1.0 shipped in early
1985, WELL BEFORE Macintosh became a commercial success.  Sure, Windows 3.0
wasn't out until 1990, but Microsoft had been spending time and money on
development and marketing of Windows for years by then...

> Give it up.  I*M clone PCs are crippled by a total lack of a real OS,
> a horrible, horrible development environment, and a totally bogus memory
> architecture.  Not to mention a toy UI and a total lack of a standard
> networking environment.

Well, I won't get into the joys of AppleTalk or lack of iconizable windows
here...  :)

[ \tom haapanen  |  "only auto racing, bullfighting and mountain climbing are ]
[ tomh@wes.on.ca |   sports -- all others are only games" -- ernest hemingway ]
[ waterloo engineering software |     "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: skaiser@polari.com (Steve Kaiser)
Subject: Re: help w/ WFW 2.0 equation editor
Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 22:47:54 GMT

stew@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Stewart Lilley) writes:

>In article <1992Sep14.060455.15312@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> stecker@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Scott D. Stecker) writes:
>>I know this question has been asked several times before, but I just recently
>>upgraded to Windows 3.1 and Word for Windows 2.0. I have a HP Deskjet 500
>>and a Compaq 33mHz 386 with 4mb ram, When I run the equation editor it comes
>>up with infamous "your printer does not not support the fences font or the
>>ms extra font" I thought that a while back somebody was able to get this
>>combination of printer/software to work? If so could they please tell me how
>>they got it to work, or email me the posting. Thanks very much.
>>  Scott Stecker
>>  stecker@gn.ecn.purdue.edu

>I'm in the same boat except that I have Windows 3.0.  If anyone has any
>info on a fix, please send it to me as well as Scott.  Thanks in advance.

>-Stew


>-- 
>**********************************************************************
>* Stewart Lilley          *  The meek shall inherit the earth:       *
>* stew@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu *  the rest of us will head for the stars. *
>**********************************************************************

It's probably not likely, but did you upgrade to Windows 3.1 *after* 
you installed Winword 2.0?  If so, the Winword installation would not
have copied the TrueType versions of Fences and MT Extra.  You would
have to install the Equation Editor again to get the TT fonts.

As for Mr. Lilley, I think you're outta luck with Windows 3.0, unless
your printer supports HP LaserJet downloadable fonts.

-- 
Steve Kaiser -- skaiser@polari.online.com    Kaiser Data
...!uunet!polari!skaiser		     1629 Harvard Ave. #509
(206) 726-0158				     Seattle, WA 98122
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM (Todd Hoff)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uh....
Date: 26 Sep 1992 19:50:39 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: oogoody.corp.sun.com

In article 4942@cs.mcgill.ca, storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes:
>	However, it might appear that I would have been better off to just
>post some interesting figures about the migration paths of Swedish Elk.
>

Please do! How fascinating. Perhaps a graph on a Windoz app? :-)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Essence of flame
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:16:04 GMT

OK Lets see how many derogatory terms I've come across (mostly in
comp.sys.amiga.advocacy):

Macintosh               MacinTrash,MacinToss
PC                      PeeCee
OS/2                    NoS/2,SloS/2, Half-an-operating-system
Windows                 Windoze
Microsoft               (Too many to list. MicroSucks and such..)
Sytos                   SyToss (tape backup software)
(Radio Shack) TRS-80    Trash 80
TRS-DOS                 TrashDOS
Amiga                   Amigo, Amigone
Amiga users             Amigoids
WordPerfect             Word Imperfect

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: furballs@sequent.com (Paul Penrod)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 08:03:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.191303.10835@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>In article <jbone.717778010@splat> jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone) writes:
>>925wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:
>>>
>>> ...[Windows] certainly has great usefulness and has done more to
>>> speed up the PC revolution than anything yet...
>>>
>>
>>I'll take that flame bait...  ;)  
>
>     Me too...
>
>
>>Windows is nothing but a low-grade rip-off of the Mac GUI, which is
>>what *truly* revolutionized PCs and the way we use them.
>
>     And, of course, the Mac GUI was nothing but a low-grade rip-off
>of the Xerox PARC work...
>
>				-Phil

Maybe so, but according to an old valley hacker (flick@flkvax.com),
AT&T owns the patents to the work.

...Paul


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
            Bureaucracy: noun, plural - Bureaucracies.
         The process of turning energy into solid waste.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: ch@sg1502.chemie.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter)
Subject: Re: Windows UI guidelines?
Organization: Philipps-University Marburg
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 15:18:12 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.182738.710@leland.Stanford.EDU>,
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:

|> Hear hear.  Take a look at NeXT and how the interface is consistent  
|> across apps, not just in menu structure and command-key combinations,  
|> but visual look and feel.  All buttons look like buttons.  Sliders  
|> are sliders.  Pop-up lists are pop-up lists.  Even toolbars are often  
|> very similar across apps (eg in graphics programs, the tools palettes  
|> have very similar icons; no need to look at the manual to see what  
|> they do).  And not only is the interface consistent, but it is also,  
|> IMHO, the most beautiful around (no flames, please, just a subjective  
|> opinion).

Sounds the same as with Windows. Buttons are buttons and sliders
are sliders. Maybe I'm some kind of genius, because I always 
found out, where to click, drag and drop, etc. :-)

What fancy Windows-Apps are you using, that you don't find the
buttons.

Christoph
-- 
Internet: ch@sg1502.chemie.uni-marburg.de
BITNET: HAMPE2@DMRHRZ11
Fido: 2:243/660
From: slo@otter.hpl.hp.com (Steve Loughran)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 13:10:07 GMT
Subject: Re: Windows UI guidelines?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy

In comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy, ruben@pollux (Ruben Robles Bermudez) writes:

> I think finally Microsoft published guidelines for the
> user interface.  

Yes. I've got that. I've also got the old win2.0 spec and the win3.0 
one (IBM's). They're ok, but no longer cover state-of-the art interfaces.

Most of the new one is devoted to dialog boxes. Now while I do not deny
that getting these right is a hard thing to do, they are secondary issues:
a "real" Direct Manipulation interface shouldn't have these.
Of course, "real" applications are too powerful for every option to be a 
control on the screen, but it is the top-level behaviour of an app which
I would rate as critical.

>There are already guidelines
> available for some the GUI's.  
Yes and programmers have to decide which guidelines to follow: should I 
use the Motif or OpenLook rules for the 3-D bits, then PenPoint's for the
pen interaction metaphor? Oh, and why don't my windows have a half-height 
title bar along the top so save space, just like visual basic:
I'm sure none-of my users will have co-ordination problems...

>[comments about letting the users define the new interface]
Yes. They should. It is very humbling to see the program you have worked so
hard on be "misunderstood" by Real Users.

However it is time consuming and expensive for everyone to do this, 
especially if it's someone trying to write the killer shareware applet on 
their home PC -the UI guidelines should be a partial substitute for user 
testing.

Side Issue: Is consistency better that usability?

> Ruben Robles
> UGA CS
> Athens, GA

	-Steve

I may have sounded a bit biased against Windows in my previous posting.
If I had wanted to flame it I would have introduced comments about Windows
for Pen computing versus PenPoint, or asked why the color selection dialog
box is so deficient compared to the NeXT one...




	
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.next.misc
From: abell@netcom.com (Steven T. Abell)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.next.misc
Subject: FCC Class A (was Considering getting an SGI indigo)
Date: 4 Oct 92 21:04:40 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

The difference between Class A and Class B is that the guvmint boys think
a Class B device *might* cause TV interference under certain circumstances,
while a Class A device *will* cause TV interference under those circumstances,
which are pretty rare in practice.

I used to work for a major manufacturer of TV equipment, which was *all*
Class A. Why does a TV manufacturer make devices that will cause TV
interference? Because that interference only affects broadcast reception.
Signals running on coax, such as in a TV station, or a home with cable TV,
are unaffected by RFI unless you are *really* trying. If you (or more
importantly, your neighbors) have cable, you will never notice. I use my
Cube at home, no problems, no complaints, no sweat. If you have a problem
with your neighbors, offer to buy them basic cable service.

Steve abell@netcom.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: ketil@linerle.ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of computer science at the University of Bergen, Norway
	<1992Sep21.134018.5380@gw.wmich.edu>
	<1992Sep22.171509.17884@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
	<1992Sep28.224446.5518@gw.wmich.edu> <jbone.717778010@splat>
Date: 30 Sep 92 15:21:36

In article <jbone.717778010@splat> jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone) writes:


   There's no innovation here, no revolution, only capitalism, which is
   fine in its own right but not worth remarking on.  You want innovation
   and revolution, you have *got* to look beyond MicroScrap.  It's 
   practically axiomatic.  

Yes, yes.  Byt *what* a marketing department they must have!  And the
bean counters seems to swallow anything they [MS] produce, and
actually believe an (unbelievable) kludge like Win is *great*

Sigh

(Disclaimer:  I really don't know windows very well, what I have seen,
 I didn't like very much...)

--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: furballs@sequent.com (Paul Penrod)
Subject: Re: Windows UI guidelines?
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 07:56:46 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.182738.710@leland.Stanford.EDU> spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu writes:
>Steve Loughran writes
>> 
>> Isn't it about time MS came out with some UI guidelines?
>
>[many well-thought out comments deleted]
>
>Hear hear.  Take a look at NeXT and how the interface is consistent  
>across apps, not just in menu structure and command-key combinations,  
>but visual look and feel.  All buttons look like buttons.  Sliders  
>are sliders.  Pop-up lists are pop-up lists.  Even toolbars are often  
>very similar across apps (eg in graphics programs, the tools palettes  
>have very similar icons; no need to look at the manual to see what  
>they do).  And not only is the interface consistent, but it is also,  
>IMHO, the most beautiful around (no flames, please, just a subjective  
>opinion).
>--
>-
>Stefano Pagiola
>Food Research Institute, Stanford University
>spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)

I agree...

The computer is essentially an answer looking for a question. If
you have access to it, read Larry Constatine's article in Computer
Language concerning this issue.

It really boils down to people use it as a TOOL to solve problems
that would take them much longer to solve without it. That is where
their interest stops, and ours as programmers and developers pick
up. A standardize presentation does lend itself to almost habit
familiarity, just like the instrument panel on an automobile.
Everything has a recognized function and place, and it makes the
learning curve extremely small in terms of navigating the software
cockpit, so to speak. However; included in our midst are short
sighted individual like Jim Manzi and John Scully,
who take the tact that the computer is there for the survival of
the company profit, rather than try and make the very tool they
promote the focus of inovation and progression; and ecourage the
support of others in breaking new ground. If they really believed
they had something worthwhile to contribute to the evolution and
success of their product, they would not be spending time
litigating, but time promoting third party support and building
inertia, by build a market place.

Hence, I firmly believe the success of interfaces such as Next and
Windows will be because these standards of presentation are
encouraged to proliferate through out the applications on these
platforms so their presentation becomes familiar to many and almost
expected...

JMHO

...Paul

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
            Bureaucracy: noun, plural - Bureaucracies.
         The process of turning energy into solid waste.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Date: 05 Oct 92 19:10:12 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1ao373INN86c@network.ucsd.edu> mbk@lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel) writes:
>
>NT, now, one might think is innovative, but again, what does it do
>that UNIX, a 70s technology OS, doesn't?
>

     This is speculation on my part, but I believe the answer to your
question is "Sell more than a handful of copies."

				-Phil
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
From: timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Date: 27 Sep 92 19:47:41 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <ALANB.92Sep26191542@swordfish.sdl.mdcbbs.com> alanb@sdl.mdcbbs.com (Alan Braggins) writes:
>>>>>> On 25 Sep 92 17:11:21 GMT, xerox@cs.vu.nl (J. A. Durieux) said:
>
>[...]
>>  So if anybody calls DOS
>> an "OS". so must Windows be..right?
>
>Of course Windows layered nature doesn't stop it being an OS. But just
>out of curiosity, _does_ anyone call DOS an OS? I thought IBM now
>described it as "a program loader and filesystem" or something similar...
>--
>Alan Braggins, Shape Data (A Division of EDS Ltd), Cambridge, UK +44-223-316673

Does that mean that tens of millions of people are using PCs without an
operating system?

- Mike
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.sgi
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 11:34:05 +0100
From: Martin_Schloeter@eurologic.fido.de (Martin Schloeter)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
X-Comment-To: xerox@cs.vu.nl (J. A. Durieux)
Organization: Die ersten 100.000 Jahre... 

JA> The main mistake y'all make is that "operating system" is not a countable
JA> substantive (like "mug"), but an uncountable one (like "tea").
JA> One can have a little bit of OS, or more OS, or a whole lot of OS.
JA> A memory manager is, or provides, some OS, and so does a file manager.
JA> A system that does both provides some more OS, and so on.
[..]
JA> more
JA> OS than Windows.  But that does not turn Windows into "not an OS", only
JA> into "less OS".  Because of the multitasking, the managing of peripherals
JA> (screen drivers, printer drives, mouse drives), font management, etc.,
JA> Windows probably provides more OS than does DOS.  So if anybody calls DOS
JA> an "OS". so must Windows be..right?
You got it perfectly to the point. I fully agree.

Greetings Martin

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: Dell Computer Co
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 14:46:50 GMT


925wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:
>
> ...[Windows] certainly has great usefulness and has done more to
> speed up the PC revolution than anything yet...
>

I'll take that flame bait...  ;)  


Windows is nothing but a low-grade rip-off of the Mac GUI, which is
what *truly* revolutionized PCs and the way we use them.  Windows is
nothing but Microsoft's attempt to create and sell to a new marketplace.
There's no innovation here, no revolution, only capitalism, which is
fine in its own right but not worth remarking on.  You want innovation
and revolution, you have *got* to look beyond MicroScrap.  It's 
practically axiomatic.  


Just my $0.02,


jb


standard disclaimers, of course.







--
-- Jeff Bone ------------------------------------------------------------
        NT...  Just say N0T.   Skate UN*X!   Standard disclaimer. 
------------------------------------------------------- jbone@dell.com --
                                                                       --
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
From: alanb@sdl.mdcbbs.com (Alan Braggins)
Date: 26 Sep 92 18:15:42 GMT
Organization: Shape Data (Division of EDS), Cambridge UK
In-reply-to: xerox@cs.vu.nl's message of 25 Sep 92 17:11:21 GMT

>>>>> On 25 Sep 92 17:11:21 GMT, xerox@cs.vu.nl (J. A. Durieux) said:

[...]
>  So if anybody calls DOS
> an "OS". so must Windows be..right?

Of course Windows layered nature doesn't stop it being an OS. But just
out of curiosity, _does_ anyone call DOS an OS? I thought IBM now
described it as "a program loader and filesystem" or something similar...
--
Alan Braggins, Shape Data (A Division of EDS Ltd), Cambridge, UK +44-223-316673
   "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
 "My employer does not necessarily share my views - but I'm working on it."
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy