Re:Typical Bigotry...Give MS a fair shot...
on
CrackThisBox Updates
·
· Score: 1
1) Well it is in RC...call it a post Beta. The difference between the RC and the Beta 3 is 11.000 errors (sorry issues...within MS there are no errors, just issues) 2) It might very well be...have not used it nad have no future plans to use it. 3) That is quite right...something borrowed... 4) Hmmmm...my quess, based on my prior experience with Windows-fanatics, is that they also bash the LinuxPPC. Also...isn't the idea to break down the damn thing in every possible way...otherwise the result of the experiments would be quite hollow, on both sides and they could just as well perform it in a controlled enviroment inside a lab. 5) You're quite right...it scares off many potential new users...prevails on file-serving capabilities...well for the ultimate file server I would personally use Novell, OS/2 or FreeBSD but Linux will catch up on most of it during the 6-8 months...a time for optimization...and then I will put it on my list. Well Linux is still a child (with that in mind, what a potential....) 6) I do not believe that Microsoft in itself is evil, they just make crappy software... couldn't have said it better myself!
There are no unbeatable odds! There are no believeable gods!
I dont think Intel would go into this much trouble just to kill the K7. The REAL problem is that K7 comes with "Slot 2" motherboards, 200MHz system frequency and co.
Well actually it won't be shipped with Slot2, but with SlotA (EV6), though it uses the same connector. The Slot2 is also an intel hrmmmm "innovation" used for the Xeon. But yes it might very well become very nasty for Intel.
Athlon got the fastest FPU on the x86 market and the chipsets is designed for multiprocessing. One word : Technical workstations and high performance servers. That area is/was deep behind Intel lines. And it is cheap.....I really hope their new german Fab's is ready..... Also they
Well according to Kryotech you'll have that very soon. A 1GHz Athlon.
Merced will not be worth waiting for (if it even becomes a reality), and I got some serious doubts on McKinley too. But the sideeffects of these might be interesting (the future HP PA RISC processors). And of course the Alpha, even if it has been quite some years on the street, the 21364 and 21464 sounds quite nasty!!!
Well IBM payed Borland to develop Borland C++ for OS/2. The 2.0 version didn't suck big time like the previous ones, and it was the last. Inprise and non-Windows development????? BAH!!!! Also..haven't MS bought some Inprise stock???
If Linux is unable to compete, why are they scared like hell. The crisis when OS/2 Warp 3.0 was released cannot even be compaired. Because aside from being a killersystem, there is no head they can chop off (The last time there was a head...IBM...and they even messed it up themselves). Another big difference from the last time (with OS/2 there where no organisation), is that the Linux community actually is quite well-organised.
In short: Linux can not be controlled! Microsoft must have control to survive, how else will they be able to sell their flawed fat-ware.
An example is the Microsoft bidding om the Linux.com domain.
Oh yes I forgot the little detail of the commercial Linux support of HP, IBM and Compaq (Did I forget somebody?).
And HP's initiative to let the Linux-community port Linux to the PA-RISC. Quite a signal!
Perhaps, but Microsoft ported Word and Excel to the OS/2 platform. I guess it was done, when porting the apps to Windows. Soon after they where discontinued.
They both were a bit primitive (reduced feature set).
I must say that the chances are that they would do a lousy job porting the thing, giving it a poor performance. Take a look at Office for MacOS. It wouldn't be good of a port was faster on a hostile and frivolous OS than the "original" running on their own OS.
Word (one of the few apps MS have created from scratch) is original a MAC application. Later ported to Windows and OS/2 (the latter died shortly after).
The kernel of WinNT was original made for the MIPS-processor, and later "half-ported" to the Intel-platform. One of the reasons for it to be slow in x86 processors. But Win2000 is the first WinNT that is specifically written for x86 processors. (Wonder how much the Alpha-port really sucks)
That taken in mind there might still be some of that old MAC-optimized (M68K) code.
But personally I couldn't care less if Office was ported to Linux. StarOffice covers it all.
Well 1) IBM, HP and Corel Systems have all accepted Linux. 2) MS gets the most profit on their apps, not on their operatingsystems (DOS/WinNT). 3) A new market.
They haven't been able to control the OSS market. Since OSS is spreading like a hell they have to be there.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Well it is in RC...call it a post Beta. The difference between the RC and the Beta 3 is 11.000 errors (sorry issues...within MS there are no errors, just issues) ... couldn't have said it better myself!
2) It might very well be...have not used it nad have no future plans to use it.
3) That is quite right...something borrowed...
4) Hmmmm...my quess, based on my prior experience with Windows-fanatics, is that they also bash the LinuxPPC. Also...isn't the idea to break down the damn thing in every possible way...otherwise the result of the experiments would be quite hollow, on both sides and they could just as well perform it in a controlled enviroment inside a lab.
5) You're quite right...it scares off many potential new users...prevails on file-serving capabilities...well for the ultimate file server I would personally use Novell, OS/2 or FreeBSD but Linux will catch up on most of it during the 6-8 months...a time for optimization...and then I will put it on my list.
Well Linux is still a child (with that in mind, what a potential....)
6) I do not believe that Microsoft in itself is evil, they just make crappy software
There are no unbeatable odds!
There are no believeable gods!
I dont think Intel would go into this much trouble just to kill the K7. The REAL problem is that K7 comes with "Slot 2" motherboards, 200MHz system frequency and co.
Well actually it won't be shipped with Slot2, but with SlotA (EV6), though it uses the same connector. The Slot2 is also an intel hrmmmm "innovation" used for the Xeon. But yes it might very well become very nasty for Intel.
Athlon got the fastest FPU on the x86 market and the chipsets is designed for multiprocessing. One word : Technical workstations and high performance servers. That area is/was deep behind Intel lines.
And it is cheap.....I really hope their new german Fab's is ready.....
Also they
Well according to Kryotech you'll have that very soon. A 1GHz Athlon.
Merced will not be worth waiting for (if it even becomes a reality), and I got some serious doubts on McKinley too. But the sideeffects of these might be interesting (the future HP PA RISC processors). And of course the Alpha, even if it has been quite some years on the street, the 21364 and 21464 sounds quite nasty!!!
Well IBM payed Borland to develop Borland C++ for OS/2. The 2.0 version didn't suck big time like the previous ones, and it was the last. Inprise and non-Windows development????? BAH!!!!
Also..haven't MS bought some Inprise stock???
Quite right!
If Linux is unable to compete, why are they scared like hell. The crisis when OS/2 Warp 3.0 was released cannot even be compaired.
Because aside from being a killersystem, there is no head they can chop off (The last time there was a head...IBM...and they even messed it up themselves). Another big difference from the last time (with OS/2 there where no organisation), is that the Linux community actually is quite well-organised.
In short: Linux can not be controlled! Microsoft must have control to survive, how else will they be able to sell their flawed fat-ware.
An example is the Microsoft bidding om the Linux.com domain.
Oh yes I forgot the little detail of the commercial Linux support of HP, IBM and Compaq (Did I forget somebody?).
And HP's initiative to let the Linux-community port Linux to the PA-RISC. Quite a signal!
I've used the Excel 3.0 for OS/2.
It is a bit more primitive than the Winslow-version.
Also there are no hotkeys!
But it is a fast little bugger!
Perhaps, but Microsoft ported Word and Excel to the OS/2 platform.
I guess it was done, when porting the apps to Windows.
Soon after they where discontinued.
They both were a bit primitive (reduced feature set).
Hi there!
I must say that the chances are that they would do a lousy job porting the thing, giving it a poor performance.
Take a look at Office for MacOS.
It wouldn't be good of a port was faster on a hostile and frivolous OS than the "original" running on their own OS.
On background of some of the prior released materials on the OS, I knew it would be competent. But it looks like we have a new monster on our hands.
I would really like to get hold of a G3 with this OS on..................I like the PowerPC G3.....
I stand corrected!
:->
But Word still sucks like hell
Well I don't know!
Word (one of the few apps MS have created from scratch) is original a MAC application. Later ported to Windows and OS/2 (the latter died shortly after).
The kernel of WinNT was original made for the MIPS-processor, and later "half-ported" to the Intel-platform. One of the reasons for it to be slow in x86 processors. But Win2000 is the first WinNT that is specifically written for x86 processors. (Wonder how much the Alpha-port really sucks)
That taken in mind there might still be some of that old MAC-optimized (M68K) code.
But personally I couldn't care less if Office was ported to Linux. StarOffice covers it all.
Well
1) IBM, HP and Corel Systems have all accepted Linux.
2) MS gets the most profit on their apps, not on their operatingsystems (DOS/WinNT).
3) A new market.
They haven't been able to control the OSS market. Since OSS is spreading like a hell they have to be there.