From: sxjcb@orca.alaska.edu (Jay C. Beavers)
Subject: Re: NS 486 pricing vs. Win NT
Followup-To: comp.sys.next.programmer
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 17:11:23 GMT

In article <BvsnsB.6Hx@iat.holonet.net>, bwilliam@iat.holonet.net (Bill
Williams) wrote:
> 
> Windows NT does not provide the ability to use 255 character file names,

Total and complete BS

> in fact most MS Windows NT users will use only 8 character file names
> because Windows NT does not really expect you to use the OS2 ish extended
> system

I'm sure they developed NTFS just for the heck of it, right?  NTFS supports
dual filenames for a file so it can be viewed with 255 characters in native
mode but can still be viewed with 8.3 from a less capable OS like Dos or
Win 3.x.

> AND BECAUSE Windows NT cannot save any files to floppy disk with
> filnames greater than 8 characters.

Not certain, NTFS is not in complete form as of the July Developer release.
 Maybe you should wait until at least the beta is out before you make
statements.  Fact sometimes helps.  (Note:  In my OS/2 install, I could
swear that the OS/2 install disks had >8.3 file names, and if this is
possible in HPFS, don't you think it would be in NTFS?)

> Windows NT ABSOLUTELY does not currenlty allow multiple displays on one
> Intel PC Clone, Though Macintoshes easily support 6 joined monitors, and I
> have used multi monitor NeXT computers.

Once more, total bunk.  It is extremely common for developers to use two
monitors -- one dedicated to debugging, so your above statement is false. 
As to NT handling multiple monitors as easily as a Mac, I doubt that will
happen on an ISA bus, but there are many other bus types out there.  I do
know you can buy special video cards that will handle multiple monitors and
that you can use virtual screen sizes in Windows now so I cannot see why
this is imposible.

> Windows NT cannot run in a turnkey startup mode. To run the first program
> after supplying power the user MUST DEPRESS CNTL-ALT-DEL before logging
> in. AND YOU MUST LOG IN EVEN IF NO PASSWORD IS SET FOR THE DEFAULT USER!

Ah, big loss here.  Maybe that's why Microsoft continues to support two
lines of products -- the Windows 3.x line can do this.  If you're doing a
turn-key, then you have absolutely no use for NT's advanced features.  You
forgot to mention that the reason the CNTL-ALT-DEL is required is because
that is the only key combination that cannot be intercepted by any program
other than Windows NT, so you are assured of not being caught by a trojan
horse login 'look-alike'.  Is this a problem in NeXTStep?  Is this a
feature or a problem for NT?

> Windows NT does not use graphical objects to draw in a non pixelated
> manner "such as Display PostScript or Apples new QuickDraw GX mammoth
> project. It is a pixellated toy using wildly divergent aspect ratio devices.

Yep, you got it there.  Now, the fact that my Win 3.1 documents are
incredibly closer to WYSIWYG than my Mac Sys 7.0.....  (No, in no way would
I say that the Win GDI is better than Display Postscript.  NeXT did an
excellent thing here...)

> Windows NT does not have an improved graphic driver interface for
> accelerator board mfgs.

What the hell does this mean?  A different API to make it easier to
incorporate hardware coding of GDI subroutines?  Can't say, haven't
programmed the DDK.

> Windows NT does not prevent a user from inserting a bootable dos diskette
> into the computer and using a disk editor on it to hack the systems disk
> directly.

NTFS cannot be read via Dos, but I suppose you mean accessing the hardware
directly.  There are plenty of solutions to prevent this if you really want
to.  Are you implying that ANY computer is secure from a person sitting at
the console of the computer?  You can get BIOS with hardware passwords for
PCs if you need that level of security and then your computer is just as
secure as any Unix box I've ever seen.

> Nor does it operate well when in full C2 security mode.

And what do you mean like this?  Any real data or just blatant opinionism? 

> Windows NT is just a boring slight rehash of Windows 3.1 in many important
> ways.

It definately still has some baggage, the worst being the program manager
and the file manager.  However, in all the ways that count, Windows NT has
been rewritten.  The baggage that is still there is easily jettisoned if
you like (like FAT, Program Manager, File Manager, even the ISA bus or even
the 80x86 processors!)

> I just Looooove 8 character file names such as "IHATEMS.DOS" don't you?

And there's absolutely nothing stopping you from continuing to use them,
Bill!  Knock yourself out!  Me, I'll be using 255 characters though.

______________________________________________________________________________
                                        |    jay@seaspray.uacn.alaska.edu
Jay C. Beavers                          |    sxjcb@orca.alaska.edu
University of Alaska Computer Network   |    sxjcb@alaska.bitnet
________________________________________|_____________________________________