Bringing all the non-vulnerable to Windows malware systems to a crawl while opening up new portals to exploits (ala ActiveX controls), doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
... that this company wants inventors who are willing to relocate. If nothing else, innovation requires comfort. It's too bad such a company can't be innovative about telecommuting.;-)
Increasing the noise level in the average office workspace will only decrease the productivity. For details, see Peopleware by DeMarco & Lister ISBN 0-932633-43-9.
Development: Executable UML by Mellor and Balcer and Executable UML:How To Build Class Models by Leon Starr The older Shlaer-Mellor books are valuable as well. Software Requirements by Wiegers
Management: Peopleware by DeMarco and Lister Slack by DeMarco
You might want to look at http://reactor-core.org/in-microsoft-we-trust.html It's obviously constructed out of bias, but presents factual information.
Here's the per-processor announcement for the OS, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/Pre_96/July94/94387.tx t.html as you can see it's 1994. This antitrust investigation was started by the FTC in 1990. http://www.courttv.com/archive/legaldocs/cyberlaw/ microsoft/state_suit.html section 11 details the case against Microsoft's bundling of Office.
NOTE: I never said Microsoft Office overtook Lotus and Wordperfect unfairly (although there has been comment on Microsoft using hidden APIs in their Office software to their advantage). Liebowitz's analysis is true in this respect. Microsoft just unfairly closed the market once they overtook the competition.
Liebowitz is definately NOT an unbiased source when it comes to Microsoft. He has been on their payroll in the past, and is known to write in their defense on any monopoly issues.
Go back to the 1990s. It was bundled, but if you chose not to get it, there was no price break. (Just like with Windows itself.)
When Microsoft got into trouble in the first antitrust case, it switched it's per-processor licensing agreements from the Windows OS to Microsoft Office. It later got in trouble for this, but like in the Windows case, the damage was done. i.e., the monopoly was in place.
Lotus and (whoever owned WordPerfect) sometime around 1995 were offering their office suite for under $100 when Microsoft Office was $300-$400. Some PC vendors tried offering the alternatives, but this went away in less than a year. (Probably due to Microsoft pressure.)
I don't know how this got modded as interesting. It is obviously a troll and flamebait.
I suggest people go read The Design of OS/2 by Deitel and Kogan and "The Early History of Smalltalk" by Alan Kay to get a real sense of the history of the PC.
I also suggest people look at ecomstation.com to see where OS/2 is today.
...eComStation was introduced to the OS/2 market.:-D
Author must be a really bad tester ...
on
Is Programming Art?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
... because he doesn't ever try to "break his code". Note that all the quoted commentary is in support of the thesis with no serious look at opposing points of view.
In order for software to be correct it must run. Running involves being mathematically correct for the target platform. i.e., sequence, size, and timing are all correct.
Artists don't rework their art based on critique, i.e., peer review.
Is CS art equal to code bloat? A wheel is a wheel; strengthening the wheel usually isn't considered art, but decorating the wheel is considered art. Non-functional decoration of software is code bloat.
Low cost engineering means killing off employee loyalty in search of a better stock price, and then packaging all of your domain knowledge for overseas distribution where you don't even have the advantage of national loyalty to protect it.
Isn't it amazing how they've managed to shift the blame for the USA losing it's technology advantage to the schools?
This guy would have been totally lost trying to get a working PC system back in 1978 when I started.
Yes PC was used before Wintel came along.
[For the totally clueless.]
Commodore, Apple, Atari, CP/M, booting off of cassette,...
It sounds like they could have the same set-up that they have with Linux running OS/2 or eComStation. i.e., Windows apps like Notes under Odin, X applications using Hoblink, Mozilla running native, OpenOffice running native, Lotus SmartSuite running native, etc.
It would be rather humorous to see IBM buying eComStation from Serenity Systems, Inc. while still providing the support for the base OS and drivers.:-)
No. Originally, what became Windows 95 was slated to be released as Cairo in 93. Cairo was too ambitious of a product to get done in the original time frame. Cairo was supposed to be the merging of the Win3.x branch with the NT branch with a bunch of new technologies thrown in to boot (like OFS).
Microsoft was probably still about two or three years away from having a releasable version of Cairo, when they decided to divert resources to produce Windows 95.
> OS/2 never even hinted at making gains in the home desktop market
IBM was getting an increase in the number of ISVs willing to to write software for OS/2, and even getting some (not many) IHVs to offer OS/2 as an option. Computer magazines were giving OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 rave reviews. Whether actual gains were realized in marketshare or not, OS/2 was getting some momentum behind it.
Slashdot Mirror
How about the "OS/2 is dead" theme? That one is still waiting to prove true.
Of course until the "applications barrier to entry is removed", eComStation, Apple, and Linux will all remain "also rans".
It's obvious that the poster is unfamiliar with vim, and only wishes to prove the superiority of his/her ignorance.
Here's a clue. Run gvim with the default settings.
Bringing all the non-vulnerable to Windows malware systems to a crawl while opening up new portals to exploits (ala ActiveX controls), doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
... that this company wants inventors who are willing to relocate. If nothing else, innovation requires comfort. It's too bad such a company can't be innovative about telecommuting. ;-)
Increasing the noise level in the average office workspace will only decrease the productivity. For details, see Peopleware by DeMarco & Lister ISBN 0-932633-43-9.
Here's an even better idea, office with a door!
Err. Why not just point him to http://www.vim.org/ ?
Better books to learn from are:
Development:
Executable UML by Mellor and Balcer and
Executable UML:How To Build Class Models by Leon Starr
The older Shlaer-Mellor books are valuable as well.
Software Requirements by Wiegers
Management:
Peopleware by DeMarco and Lister
Slack by DeMarco
Data:
An Introduction to Database Systems by Date
Just think of all the wasted energy that could have been diverted elsewhere if we had standardized on TeX, Postscript, or ??? many years ago. :-(
Move all your users to eComStation clients, so you won't have to be concerned with AV software or any existing trojons.
You might want to look at http://reactor-core.org/in-microsoft-we-trust.html It's obviously constructed out of bias, but presents factual information.x t.html as you can see it's 1994. This antitrust investigation was started by the FTC in 1990./ microsoft/state_suit.html section 11 details the case against Microsoft's bundling of Office.
Here's the per-processor announcement for the OS, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/Pre_96/July94/94387.t
http://www.courttv.com/archive/legaldocs/cyberlaw
NOTE: I never said Microsoft Office overtook Lotus and Wordperfect unfairly (although there has been comment on Microsoft using hidden APIs in their Office software to their advantage). Liebowitz's analysis is true in this respect. Microsoft just unfairly closed the market once they overtook the competition.
Liebowitz is definately NOT an unbiased source when it comes to Microsoft. He has been on their payroll in the past, and is known to write in their defense on any monopoly issues.
Go back to the 1990s. It was bundled, but if you chose not to get it, there was no price break. (Just like with Windows itself.)
When Microsoft got into trouble in the first antitrust case, it switched it's per-processor licensing agreements from the Windows OS to Microsoft Office. It later got in trouble for this, but like in the Windows case, the damage was done. i.e., the monopoly was in place.
Lotus and (whoever owned WordPerfect) sometime around 1995 were offering their office suite for under $100 when Microsoft Office was $300-$400. Some PC vendors tried offering the alternatives, but this went away in less than a year. (Probably due to Microsoft pressure.)
The nicer interface is only a small part of the battle. The bundling of office for "free" with all of the PCs sold was what really pushed it.
I don't know how this got modded as interesting. It is obviously a troll and flamebait. I suggest people go read The Design of OS/2 by Deitel and Kogan and "The Early History of Smalltalk" by Alan Kay to get a real sense of the history of the PC. I also suggest people look at ecomstation.com to see where OS/2 is today.
It had to be said. ;-)
Game console becomes set-top box; set-top box becomes PC; game console gets invented.
"Forward into the past!" - Firesign Theater
...eComStation was introduced to the OS/2 market. :-D
... because he doesn't ever try to "break his code". Note that all the quoted commentary is in support of the thesis with no serious look at opposing points of view.
In order for software to be correct it must run. Running involves being mathematically correct for the target platform. i.e., sequence, size, and timing are all correct.
Artists don't rework their art based on critique, i.e., peer review.
Is CS art equal to code bloat? A wheel is a wheel; strengthening the wheel usually isn't considered art, but decorating the wheel is considered art. Non-functional decoration of software is code bloat.
... they're hiring overseas firms to do it. ;-)
Low cost engineering means killing off employee loyalty in search of a better stock price, and then packaging all of your domain knowledge for overseas distribution where you don't even have the advantage of national loyalty to protect it.
Isn't it amazing how they've managed to shift the blame for the USA losing it's technology advantage to the schools?
just search out his columns on OS/2 from the mid to late '90s. The Linux comments in the linked article were like a walk down memory lane. ;-)
This guy would have been totally lost trying to get a working PC system back in 1978 when I started. Yes PC was used before Wintel came along. [For the totally clueless.] Commodore, Apple, Atari, CP/M, booting off of cassette, ...
We interrupt this download for a word from our sponsors. After 5 minutes of commercials, you'll be wanting dial-up. ;-)
It sounds like they could have the same set-up that they have with Linux running OS/2 or eComStation. i.e., Windows apps like Notes under Odin, X applications using Hoblink, Mozilla running native, OpenOffice running native, Lotus SmartSuite running native, etc. It would be rather humorous to see IBM buying eComStation from Serenity Systems, Inc. while still providing the support for the base OS and drivers. :-)
No. Originally, what became Windows 95 was slated to be released as Cairo in 93. Cairo was too ambitious of a product to get done in the original time frame. Cairo was supposed to be the merging of the Win3.x branch with the NT branch with a bunch of new technologies thrown in to boot (like OFS).
Microsoft was probably still about two or three years away from having a releasable version of Cairo, when they decided to divert resources to produce Windows 95.
> OS/2 never even hinted at making gains in the home desktop market IBM was getting an increase in the number of ISVs willing to to write software for OS/2, and even getting some (not many) IHVs to offer OS/2 as an option. Computer magazines were giving OS/2 2.1 and 3.0 rave reviews. Whether actual gains were realized in marketshare or not, OS/2 was getting some momentum behind it.