Newsgroups: bit.listserv.win3-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 12:50:26 PST
From:         "Vance M. Gloster" <gloster@INFERENCE.COM>
Subject:      No WINDOWS NT for us ||||||||
              16 Nov 1992 08:56:09 CET
              <9211160900.AA09507@fourier.inference.com>

I recall that during the great OS/2 vs. Win 3.1 flames a few months
ago many of the Windows advocates indicated that they were not
interested in an operating system that required 8 meg and a 386.  The
OS/2 advocates indicated that they wanted a true 32-bit operating
system.  Others have requested the capability of easily porting UNIX
applications, running on faster processors, etc.  It seems to me that
Microsoft has tried to architect a plan that will help them and
third-party developers address these diverse markets, no matter which
ones eventually dominate.

No one operating system is going to work for the guy with a 2 meg 286,
the guy with a 16 meg 486, and the guy with a high-end workstation.
The one thing that Microsoft could do was to provide several operating
systems with a common API, and the ability to run programs from
"neighbor" versions of the operating system.

The following chart shows the various types of source code, and which
versions of the Windows family of operating systems it will run on.
The "NT 386 multi" operating system is a version of NT for
multi-processor Intel machines which are currently made by NCR and
Compaq.  The entries with an "X" indicate that the lowest-level binary
will run, and the entries with an "R" indicate that a recompile is
necessary.  MFC is C++ code which uses Microsoft's class library (now
also available with other compilers).  POSIX is UNIX source code
written for portability among UNIX platforms.

        3.1 Standard | 3.1 Enhanced | NT 386 | NT 386 multi | NT RISC
Win 3.0       X      |        X     |    X   |        X     |  X
Win 3.1       X      |        X     |    X   |        X     |  X
Win 32               |        X     |    X   |        X     |  R
MFC           X      |        X     |    R   |        R     |  R
POSIX                |              |    X   |        X     |  R
OS/2                 |              |    X   |        X     |

There is currently no support for graphical environment code from UNIX
or OS/2, but the second release of NT should take care of it.

What does this mean for developers?  That we do not need to worry
about what the market will do.  We can develop our code for the MFC
(for instance) and if everybody continues to buy 386SXs with 2 meg of
RAM, our product will run on it.  If, on the other hand, everybody
buys P5 machines with 32 meg running NT our product will also run on
that.  You, the buying public, decide what is the best environment for
your use.  We do not end up blackmailing you into purchasing a
particular setup in order to run our code.

In response to Espen H}konsen's assertion that NT is slow, the first
beta was quite slow in some ways.  They had not done any speed
optimization on it.  The new beta is faster, but all the speed
optimizations are not in it yet.  We have found that large complex
programs run significantly faster on NT (when converted to run
"native") because they do not need to deal with the stupid limits
inherent in 16-bit Windows.

I'm personally excited about using an environment that can bring the
best software from Windows, OS/2, and UNIX together on the same
desktop while providing a 32-bit true multitasking protected operating
system.  I do not feel that this product breaks any promises.

-Vance Gloster
 gloster@inference.com

"My own personal opinions, not those of my employer"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.win3-l