From: demillo@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Robert DeMillo )
Subject: Re: Why I'm sticking with Windows
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43
	<1992Apr15.214354.22770@cs.mcgill.ca> <1992Apr16.005519.25943@ncsu.edu>
Date: 16 Apr 92 11:37:52

In article <1992Apr16.005519.25943@ncsu.edu> linville@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (John W. Linville) writes:
> In article <1992Apr15.214354.22770@cs.mcgill.ca> becap@cs.mcgill.ca (Brian CAPSON) writes:

> >> Do you even know what features OS/2 has?
> >
> >Come on John. I'm getting sick and tired of your know-it-all condescending  
> >remarks. Your ignorant reply to someone who disagrees with you is that they  
> It sounds like to me that your are the conescending know-it-all.

You know John, I think we are *all* getting a little tired of this.
Brian's response to you was well-reasoned and well-written, even though
your initial message to him was fairly offensive and inflammatory.

> >I have also used NT, and read its specs. NT definately is the better OS. Sorry.  

> Where have you used NT?  Did you give it a 'full workout'?  What kind of 
> machine was it running on?

Why does this matter to you?

> I haven't originated any of the threads here.  If I see something that I 
> consider disinformation, or if I see a question about OS/2 that I can answer,
> I will post.

John, I seem to remember being a victim of your correction of disinformation
even though I had a disclaimer that what I was reporting was from another
magazine. Your "correction" was not a correction, but a personal attack
on me. Something I did not appreciate, and I will not forget in the future.

> >> >I'm not convinced that IBM does have access to the NT source, but if they  
> >do,
> >> 
> >> Not only do they have access to it, they are still partially funding the 
> >> project due to existing contractual obligations.
> >
> >Tell me John, where do you get your information? My sources at Microsoft tell  
> >me this is absurd.

> It is (relatively) common knowledge, and it has been confirmed by the IBMers on
> the net many times.  It is included in the same 'family' of agreements that 
> gives IBM access to Windows 3.x code and gives Microsoft access to OS/2 2.0 
> code.

> Your sources at Microsoft are wrong.

Aside from the fact that the information I have corresponds to Brian's,
there is something I'd like to get straight. Are you saying that
sources on the net are reliable, but information from MicroSoft
isn't? 

> Truthfully, the tone of your response and your hinting of Microsoft contacts
> indicates possible past/present/future employment by Microsoft.  If so, then
> I can see why you might take it personally when someone (such as myself) points
> out the flaws in Windows.

You don't point out flaws, Jon...you attack. That puts people in a
defensive posture, and then you feel justified in your attack. Grow up.

> In the future, if you want to insult me and/or patronize me, please do it by
> e-mail so I don't feel compelled to respond here where it apparently angers
> so many.

Like you do, you mean?





--
 - Rob DeMillo			| Internet: 	 demillo@juliet.ll.mit.edu
   MIT Lincoln Lab 		| Also Internet: rjd@brown.cs.edu
   Weather Sensing - Group 43	| Reality: 617-981-2105 (office)

"Operation Goofy now in effect!"
	--- Tom Servo, "Gamera vs. Gaos," Mystery Science Theater 3000

Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms