From: williams@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Williams)
Subject: Re: Windows NT Report
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 16:04:16 GMT

In article <9212221409.36@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>NT will only support the "top 100" DOS applications.  Porting UNIX
>software will be difficult as there aren't any UNIX compatible libraries.

This is incorrect and misleading.  I don't have the exact quote handy,
and Lord knows that public statements by Microsoft are notoriously
inaccurate, but as I recall, Microsoft has promised that *at least*
the top 100 Windows and top 100 DOS applications will be supported.
My take on this is that Microsoft will only go out of its way (i.e.,
put in special hacks) to support these apps.  Many, many other
DOS/Windows apps will run unchanged under NT.  I haven't checked out
too many things on my NT Beta yet, but so far everything has worked.

>> [ I lost the attribution for the >> quotes, sorry.  - Jim ]

>>3)  Ease of programability.  Windows is much easier to problem in than
>>X.  Even though it doesn't have all the advantages of X, we can live
>>without them for the benefits we gain.  Not only that, but there are X
>>servers coming out for NT for those needing X.  But we finally have a
>>choice.
>
>Windows sucks.  Microsoft will not support X-11 on NT.

How do you mean this?  Will they actively try to stop 3rd parties from
porting X to NT?  I don't think so...

>NT will have incomplete TCP/IP support, no telnet, no rlogin, and no ftp.

Are you referring to clients or servers?  NT already has a telnet and
an ftp client.  NT will be very popular as a PC Lan server and I
expect market pressure (Government Sales alone!) will force Microsoft
to support telnet/ftp servers as well, if only via third parites.

>NT does not have serial port logins.

Part of the NT philosophy, and yes it's stupid.

>NT mainly supports acting as a server for Windows 3.x boxes.

So?

>The Windows 3.x support on NT is such that a hacker could easily write a
>Windows app that would walk right through NT's security.

Really?  If true, that's a serious flaw.  How is this done?  I'm not
(yet) a Windows programmer.

>NT is not UNIX.  The NT beta doesn't even have a decent cli.  NT needs
>16 megs of memory.  SVR3.2 can do real work with 4 megs of memory.

I'm running NT on 8 meg, but I'll agree it could use more.

>NT cannot take the place of a UNIX server in a network, not even a DOS
>network.
>
>Microsoft will say anything to get people to buy NT, because they are
>scared of OS/2.
>

Now they can also be scared of Novell, which just bought USL!  With
Novell in charge of Real Unix (tm), I think the probablility that I'll
some day find Unix applications at Egghead just jumped several orders
of magnitude.  Alas, I personally won't buy the Novell/USL product, no 
matter how much I love Unix, unless Novell drops the horrid USL vs
BSDI lawsuit.

>
>Rick Kelly	rmk@rmkhome.UUCP	merk!rmkhome!rmk	rmk@frog.UUCP

A lifetime Unix biggot, learning NT in self defense,
Jim
-- 
Spoken: James W. Williams			Company: Hughes STX
Internet: williams@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov		Phone: +1 301 286-1131
USPS: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Code 633; Greenbelt, MD 20771
Maryland Car Tags: DEV CAR