Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends


			      USENET Archives

From: alistair@microsoft.UUCP (Alistair BANKS)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <74246@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 17 Aug 91 08:43:32 GMT
Reply-To: alistair@microsoft.COM (Alistair BANKS)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 13


At the Windows 3.1 conference held this week (12/13 Aug, 1991) in Seattle
we distributed a detailed white paper on the Windows 32-bit API and
products it would be deliverred in, including Windows NT.

We're in the process of setting up an ftp site on uunet.uu.net, intending
to upload more useful information to it over time.

You can now download ntwn32.zip, a zipped postscript file, or ntwn32.rtf,
an rtf format (text only version) of this white paper by anonymous
ftp from uunet.uu.net in the ~ftp/vendor/microsoft/isv-communications
directory - more details in the ntwn32.readme file in the same directory.

Alistair Banks, Microsoft Systems Division

From: dclayton@bcarh775.bnr.ca (Don Clayton)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp>
Date: 20 Aug 91 17:28:10 GMT
References: <1895@nih-csl.nih.gov> <74246@microsoft.UUCP> 
<1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu>
Sender: news@bigsur.uucp
Reply-To: dclayton@bcarh775.UUCP ()
Organization: BNR Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 10


What exactly is the point of Windows 32 (or NT or whatever)?  It seems to do
the same thing as OS/2 V 2.0 (multitask win 3.0 and DOS apps.).  It sounds
likes it's just a polical thing (you know, make more money for MS instead of for
IBM).  Any Ideas?  This is directed at those that have read the White Paper (save
me from wasting any money downloading it if I don't need it).

Don
#include <stddisclosure>
Superman never made any money, saving the world from Solomon Grundy 
  - Crash Test Dummies.

From: bonneau@hyper.hyper.com (Paul Bonneau)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug20.220312.7001@hyper.hyper.com>
Date: 20 Aug 91 22:03:12 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp>
Reply-To: bonneau@hyper.UUCP (Paul Bonneau,,)
Organization: HyperCube Inc.
Lines: 38


In article <1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> dclayton@bcarh775.UUCP () writes:
>What exactly is the point of Windows 32 (or NT or whatever)?  It seems to do
>the same thing as OS/2 V 2.0 (multitask win 3.0 and DOS apps.).  It sounds
>likes it's just a polical thing (you know, make more money for MS instead of for
>IBM).  Any Ideas?  This is directed at those that have read the White Paper (save
>me from wasting any money downloading it if I don't need it).
>
The really cool thing about this whole NT technology thing is
that it makes writing new operating systems easy.  At the heart
of NT is a nuclear kernel.  Unlike the kernel of a
traditional OS, this provides a lower level API, of many
granular calls.  This allows things like DOS, Win32, OS/2,
etc., to be written to an existing API.

This in turn promotes multiple virtual operating systems, and
ensures smooth interoperability.

At the developer's conference, MS more or less officially
stated that they have given up on IBM (no surprise to anyone
I'm sure).  Before this decision, NT technology was to have
been targeted for OS/2, so I don't believe the current
repositioning to be 100% politically motivated (it just makes
sense in light of the fact the Microsoft no longer cares a
rats ass about OS/2).

Also, of course, NT will on run all of the MIPS machines of
the ACE consortium.  This means you will see Windows running
on things like multiprocessor IRIS workstations!

The white paper is interesting reading.  It makes it look
like Microsoft is going after the *entire* GUI market.

>Superman never made any money, saving the world from Solomon Grundy 
>  - Crash Test Dummies.
>
Great group!

cheers - Paul Bonneau.

From: coates@UC780.UMD.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug21.015104.10701@socrates.umd.edu>
Date: 21 Aug 91 01:51:04 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp>,<1991Aug20.220312.7001@hyper.hyper.com>
Sender: news@socrates.umd.edu (News)
Reply-To: coates@UC780.UMD.EDU
Organization: The University of Maryland, University College
Lines: 3


Is there any way we non uucp'ers can get the white paper ref WinNT?
---
coates@uc780.umd.edu

From: donnel@helix.nih.gov (Donald A. Lehn)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1920@nih-csl.nih.gov>
Date: 21 Aug 91 13:52:18 GMT
References: <1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> 
<1991Aug20.220312.7001@hyper.hyper.com> <1991Aug21.015104.10701@socrates.umd.edu>
Sender: news@nih-csl.nih.gov
Followup-To: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Organization: National Institutes of Health, Bethesda
Lines: 294


In article <1991Aug21.015104.10701@socrates.umd.edu> coates@UC780.UMD.EDU writes:
>Is there any way we non uucp'ers can get the white paper ref WinNT?
>---
>coates@uc780.umd.edu

For those who are interested, here it is:

I know this may be excessive band width but I found it interesting and
am sure it is of general interest to Window's programmers.

The Windows 32-Bit API: 
An Overview 
 
Since its original release in 1985, Microsoft  Windows has become the leading  
graphical system for IBM compatible personal computers. Version 3.0, relased in May  
1990, was a milestone that broke the 640K barrier of the Microsoft MS-DOS operating  
system by running applications in protected mode, thus making it possible to develop  
much more sophisticated applications. This innovation spawned myriad applications  
and is responsible for the huge success of the Windows environment in the marketplace  
showcased by the volume of graphical applications sold (see Figures 1 and 2). 
Between May 1990 and May 1991, more than 4 million copies of Version 3.0 were  
sold. International Data Corporation estimates that an additional 7.8 million copies will  
be sold during 1992. In addition, more than 66 thousand Microsoft Windows Software  
Development Kits version 3.0 have been shipped, a clear indication of the number of  
applications likely to appear during the next 12 to 18 months. By spring 1991, more  
than 1200 Windows-based applications were shipping. 
Building on this achievement and on the success of independent software  
developers, Microsoft is extending and expanding the Windows environment so that  
Windows-based applications can run on a broad range of computing platforms - from  
low-end battery-operated portables to high-end RISC workstations and multiprocessor  
servers. 
We are expanding Windows to make it fully 32-bit, and are adding additional  
operating system services. Microsoft Windows for Pen Computing and Microsoft  
Windows with Multimedia Extensions will also take advantage of new hardware  
technologies. 
WINDOWS TODAY 
Today many people think of Windows as a graphical add-on to the familiar MS- 
DOS operating system they have used for years.  This perception took much of the fear  
out of upgrading to Windows for the end user. But in fact, Windows is not limited by  
MS-DOS. 
Windows is a complete operating system that provides extra features on top of MS- 
DOS and replaces certain MS-DOS features.  Windows Version 3.0 does not use MS- 
DOS screen or keyboard I/O, does not use MS-DOS memory management, and can even  
bypass MS-DOS file I/O with new Windows-specific device drivers. Version 3.0  
Enhanced-mode can handle 32-bit device drivers that are not limited by the infamous  
640K MS-DOS barrier. These drivers talk through Windows to applications that are also  
not limited by the constraints of MS-DOS.  
The advantage of being able to work with MS-DOS is that it preserves the value  
added by MS-DOS s long life span (in computer years). Windows can run with MS- 
DOS TSRs, MS-DOS device drivers, and of course, it can run MS-DOS applications.   
Future versions of Windows will continue to be available on MS-DOS.  
THE WINDOWS ARCHITECTURE 
Since the IBM PC was introduced in 1981, personal computers have become much  
more diverse in capability and in configuration. This diversity will increase in the next  
few years as personal computers based on RISC processors and multiprocessor systems  
are introduced.   
These diverse systems have different operating system needs.  For example, a low- 
end battery-operated portable requires minimal memory and hard disk footprint to  
minimize weight and cost.  It also requires power management to extend battery life.  In  
contrast, network servers and mission-critical desktops require sophisticated security to  
ensure the integrity of data.  RISC-based systems require portability for both the  
operating system and the applications. 
Some vendors feel that the diverse range of hardware requires totally different  
operating systems with incompatible applications.  They sell different operating  
systems for personal computers, workstations, servers, and in the future, pen-based  
systems.  Each of their operating systems require unique, incompatible applications.   
Connectivity between these divergent platforms is complicated. 
Microsoft is focused on a much simpler solution.  We re extending Windows into  
multiple, fully compatible implementations.  Different implementations of Windows  
will be optimized for different classes of hardware.  Customer investment in Windows  
development and Windows applications will be protected.  Windows applications will  
run across the spectrum of hardware, from notepad-sized pen systems, to mission- 
critical desktops, to multiprocessor and RISC based systems. 
Microsoft Windows is evolving into a complete operating system architecture.  The  
Windows architecture addresses diverse requirements by supporting different modes of  
operation.  Today Windows has three modes: Real-mode, Standard-mode, and  
Enhanced-mode.  Real-mode provides compatibility with previous versions of  
Microsoft Windows.  Standard-mode is optimized for an 80286 processor and provides  
access to the full 16 MB of memory supported by that chip.  Enhanced-mode takes  
advantage of the 80386 and 80486 processors by providing support for multiple DOS  
applications and thru a technique called demand paging, provides applications with  
access to more memory then is physically present in the machine.  All three modes  
support both DOS and Windows applications. 
Building upon the success of Microsoft Windows Version 3.0, Microsoft will  
introduce Version 3.1 in late 1991.  Version 3.1 incorporates significant customer  
feedback; it improves performance, introduces a newly designed file manager, improves  
network connectivity, and improves system reliability.  Version 3.1 will support  
Windows Standard-mode and Enhanced-mode. 
Also during 1991, Microsoft will enhance Windows Standard-mode and Enhanced- 
mode by providing extensions for sound, animation, and CD-ROM access, called  
Windows with Multimedia.  We will also release extensions for clipboard and pen-style  
computing, called Microsoft Windows for Pen Computing.  
WINDOWS NT 
In 1992, Microsoft will introduce a new product called Windows NT (New  
Technology).  Windows NT is built on a modern, 32-bit, operating system kernel.    
Windows NT will deliver an extremely robust client environment for mission-critical  
applications, a high-end desktop platform, and a portable, scalable server environment  
(See Figure 3).  Windows NT will also transform Windows into a Microsoft LAN  
Manager server platform, thus adding a fourth server platform to the three currently  
supported by LAN Manager:  OS/2, UNIX, and VMS. 
Windows NT does not require DOS to function.  However, it is compatible with the  
large installed base of DOS and Windows applications.  In addition to compatibility  
with existing applications, Windows NT includes the features required to meet the  
needs of the high-end desktop and server marketplace in the 1990s and beyond.   
To support large server applications, Windows NT provides completely symmetric  
multiprocessor support.  With Windows NT, tasks are symmetrically distributed  
between processors on a per thread basis.  This design provides maximum utilization of  
each processor in a multiprocessor system and simplifies the development of  
multiprocessor applications. 
Security is required for network servers and many mission-critical applications.  To  
meet this need, Windows NT has been designed as a secure operating system.   
Microsoft is working with the U.S. Government to certify Windows NT as C2-level  
secure.  In addition, the internal design of Windows NT can be enhanced in future  
releases to B-level security. 
Windows NT is highly portable.  It is being developed concurrently on x86 and  
MIPS-based RISC platforms. MIPS-based computers will be available from more than  
60 hardware manufacturers who are members of the ACE (Advanced Computing  
Environment) consortium.  With Windows NT, existing DOS and Windows programs  
will run unchanged on MIPS-based computers. 
In addition to these advanced capabilities, the kernel-based design of Windows NT  
can be thought of as a nucleus which is compatible with different operating system  
environments.  The kernel design provides Windows NT compatibility with DOS and  
Windows applications.  It also allows Windows NT to support the OS/2 and POSIX  
application program interfaces, both of which are under development at Microsoft.  This  
design also allows Windows NT to support applications written to the new Windows 32- 
Bit application program interface. 
WINDOWS 32-BIT API 
Developers and end-users have made enormous investments in Windows  
programming and Windows applications.  Most of these applications have been  
developed to run on both the 16-bit 80286 processor and the 32-bit 80386 and 80486  
systems.  Although highly capable, programs written to the Windows 16-Bit API, which  
is supported by Windows 3.0, are constrained by the memory limits inherent in a 16-bit  
architecture.  Code must be divided into segments which cannot exceed 64K (65,536  
bytes).  This makes programming more difficult.  It also imposes a performance penalty  
on high-performance 80486 and RISC-based systems. 
The success of Windows Version 3.0, made it clear that an easy migration path from  
existing 16-bit Windows applications to a 32-bit programming interface was required.   
Unfortunately, OS/2 Presentation Manager (PM) was not an appropriate path.  Although  
similar in appearance from an end-user perspective, the programming details of  
Windows and PM are completely different.  So different in fact that most software  
developers found it necessary to completely rewrite their application when going from  
Windows to Presentation Manager.  This is a major reason why there are so few OS/2  
PM applications available. 
The Windows 32-Bit API (Windows 32) has been designed to make the transition  
from the Windows 16-Bit API (Windows 16) to 32-bit as easy as possible.  Only  
minimal changes have been made to the syntax of the Windows 32 API.  The API names  
are the same as Windows 16.  The semantics are identical.  The message order is  
identical.  In fact, it is possible to keep a single source code base and compile that  
source code into both 16-bit and 32-bit programs (see Figure 4). 
While the Windows 32 API is extremely compatible with the Windows-16 API, it  
also contains significant new features.  These features include preemptive multitasked  
processes that use separate address spaces, preemptive threads, semaphores, shared  
memory, named pipes, mailslots, and memory mapped file I/O.  GDI (Graphics Device  
Interface) improvements include Bizier curves, paths, transforms, and a device- 
independent color model. 
The Windows 32-Bit API is fully supported in both Windows Enhanced-mode and  
Windows NT-mode.  The Windows 32-Bit API will first be available in the Windows  
NT product during 1992.  It will be added to Windows Enhanced-mode in late 1992 or  
early 1993.  Programs written to the Windows 32-Bit API will run binary compatibly on  
both Windows NT-mode and Windows Enhanced-mode.  All Windows 32 features are  
supported by both Windows Enhanced-mode and Windows NT-mode, including  
preemptive multitasking.  Windows 32 programs will be fully source compatible  
between  x86 and MIPS processors.  Software Developer Kits for the Windows 32-Bit  
API will be available in late 1991. 
The following highlights some key features of the Windows 32-Bit API. 
Kernel: The Base Operating System 
The Windows 32-Bit API on both Window NT-mode and Windows Enhanced-mode  
provides preemptive thread-based multitasking. It also runs all Windows 32-Bit and  
MS-DOS applications in separate address spaces so that they cannot corrupt one  
another. 
The Windows 32-Bit API is designed to be portable beyond the 80386 and 80486  
processors and in particular to be portable to RISC architectures. All these processors  
have different features but have in common 32-bit addressing and paged virtual memory  
architectures. Paged virtual memory is more efficient to implement and executes faster  
than segmented virtual memory. Memory management in Windows 32-Bit is secure  
because the operating system places different memory objects in different pages of  
memory and allows an application to control access permissions (Read, Write,  
Read/Write, Execute, and so on) to memory objects. 
Given a large 32-bit address space, the operating system can conveniently and  
efficiently optimize file I/O because processes treat the file as a very large memory  
object and randomly access that object. The operating system, through page faulting,  
can detect read access to a file and bring in that data. It can detect when a shared file
is written to and then write out that data. With process-settable access permissions and  
sparse allocation of physical memory pages, processes can implement very efficient  
data access, even when access patterns are entirely unpredictable. 
GDI Improvements: Biziers, Paths, Transforms, Device-Independent Color 
GDI, the drawing API for Windows Versions 3.0 and 3.1, provides a useful device- 
independent drawing set for applications. As output devices have become more  
sophisticated, so have drawing needs; hence GDI has been improved. 
Some Windows applications for Versions 3.0 and 3.1 have needed to implement  
high-level graphics functions using the low-level drawing primitives of the Windows  
environment. Although this capability has provided application vendors flexibility in  
extending the Windows GDI, it has not allowed them to take seamless advantage of  
advances in printer and display technology. Application developers have had to code  
their own algorithms for displaying graphics such as Bizier curves and paths. With the  
Windows 32-Bit API, developers can call new high-level graphics features that will take  
advantage of the built-in drawing capabilities in advanced output hardware. Under  
Windows 32, displaying Bizier curves can be handled by the graphics engine or by  
output devices that have implemented Bizier optimizations. 
The Windows 32 GDI is a complete and general-purpose drawing package. Bizier  
curves are a general-purpose curve primitive from which a straight line can also be  
derived. This function combined with the PolyBizier functionality makes it possible to  
draw any combination of continuous lines and curves. 
Windows 32  adds a Path API. A BeginPath EndPath sequence "closes" the  
sequence of drawing primitives between Begin and End. Thus, a BeginPath,  
PolyPolyBizier, EndPath sequence makes it possible to draw an arbitrary number of  
different filled shapes. 
The Windows 32 transform API maps the virtual two-dimensional surface on which  
you draw to the two-dimensional output surface. This API, combined with the TrueType  
font technology first available with Windows Version 3.1, makes it possible to draw  
truly device-independent graphics that the system can map to the display surface,  
including the rotation of bitmaps, fonts, and metafiles. 
Windows 32 will also provide a device-independent color model. Computer  
monitors and color printers use different technology to render colors.  Additive mixing  
is used by computer monitors (RGB or Red, Green, Blue), while subtractive mixing  
(CYMK or Cyan, Yellow, Magenta, Black) is used by color printers.  Without device- 
independent color, the different approach used by monitors and printers can result in  
mismatched colors. 
The Windowing System and System Classes 
The Windows windowing system is called User.  The most significant change to  
User is the desynchronization of the per-window message queue from the system  
message queue. This change prevents errant, looping applications that stop processing  
their messages from blocking the computer system s entire user interface, thus making  
other applications unavailable. 
With the addition of input queue time thresholds, the system can provide default  
handling for a looping or an otherwise nonresponsive process.  From an end-user  
perspective, this means the they can do other things while one application is busy.  For  
example, if a word processing program is busy printing a 100 page document, a user can  
minimize that application and begin working on a spreadsheet.  This effectively  
minimizes the time the user waits with an "hourglass" on their screen. 
The desynchronization of the message queue is completely compatible with the  
Windows Versions 3.0 and 3.1 message model. The message ordering is the same. If  
WM_xyz came after WM_abc, it still does. This compatibility is entirely necessary  
because in Windows 32 systems, existing Windows applications run on top of the  
Windows 32-Bit message system. The messages are simply copied from the 32-bit stack  
to the 16-bit stack and passed onto the application; therefore message order cannot  
change. 
Networking Extensions 
Each time the APIs are further standardized in a particular area, it becomes easier to  
write significant new applications. Because of the variety of networking layers, ranging  
from network card interfaces and protocol stacks to the wide array of network IPC  
mechanisms, networking is probably the most confusing interface for developers today.  
Windows 32 will include standard network APIs that can replace those that network  
providers have previously needed to supply. Windows 32 will expose driver-style  
interfaces similar to the WinNet APIs provided by Windows Version 3.0 so that third- 
party vendors can plug their network services into the Windows open architecture. 
Some of the new, 32-bit WinNet APIs being defined are file, print, named pipes,  
mailslots, server browsing and machine configuration.  This means applications can rely  
on a consistent programming interface regardless of the underlying network.  Even if a  
network is not present, the APIs are still available and will return appropriate error  
codes. 
The Windows 32-Bit API includes peer-to-peer named pipes, mailslots, and APIs to  
enable RPC (Remote Procedure Call) compilers. With Windows 32, a mail-server  
vendor can build a messaging service on named pipes and asynchrononous  
communication that will run on top of any network operating system, protocol stack, or  
network card - each of which could come from a different network vendor. 
Compatibility with Windows 16-Bit APIs  
Windows Version 3.0 and 3.1 applications will be able to run in Windows  
Enhanced-mode and Windows NT-mode systems that support the Windows 32 API. To  
be compatible with versions 3.0 and 3.1, all Windows 16 applications will run as one  
process in one address space. They will be nonpreemptive with respect to one another  
but preemptive with respect to the rest of the system, which mirrors their behavior  
under Windows Version 3.0 Enhanced-mode. Windows 16 applications run against the  
Windows 32-Bit APIs without a "layer" and without any state mapping or message  
reordering like that necessary to run them on OS/2 version 2.0. 
Windows executables will also run on RISC-based Windows NT machines (see  
Figure 5).  Excellent performance is expected on this platform because although some  
code will be run against 80286 emulator technology, all Windows calls will be mapped  
directly to the Windows NT software.   
WINDOWS 32-BIT APIS-THE FUTURE OF WINDOWS 
Millions of people are actively using Windows Version 3.0 today.  Corporations and  
independent software vendors are making major commitments to Windows and  
investments in Windows applications. 
To protect this investment, Microsoft is evolving Windows into a complete  
architecture.  Through separate implementations, Microsoft Windows will run on vastly  
different types of hardware; from pen-based notepad computers to multiprocessor and  
RISC systems. 
Windows NT and future versions of Windows Enhanced-mode will support the  
Windows 32-Bit APIs.  Designed to simplify migration of Windows applications from  
16-bit to 32-bit, these APIs will also make it easy to develop new 32-bit Windows  
applications.  They contain significant new features which will enable a new generation  
of powerful Windows applications. 
In addition, the Windows 32-Bit APIs will be used as the foundation for future  
versions of Windows under development at Microsoft.  This technology, often called  
Information at Your Fingertips, will make it even easier to use personal computers and  
will provide significant new functionality to Windows users. 



--
Donald A. Lehn, Ph.D.                      Phone: (301) 496-2885
Bldg.37 Rm 3D20                            FAX:   (301) 496-8419
National Cancer Institute / NIH            Email: donnel@helix.nih.gov
Bethesda MD 20892

From: timr@gss.com (Tim Roberts)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Summary: Honesty is such a lonely word
Message-ID: <1991Aug21.164702.19620@gss.com>
Date: 21 Aug 91 16:47:02 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp>
Organization: Graphic Software Systems, Beaverton, OR
Lines: 21


In article <1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> dclayton@bcarh775.UUCP () writes:
>What exactly is the point of Windows 32 (or NT or whatever)?  It seems to do
>the same thing as OS/2 V 2.0 (multitask win 3.0 and DOS apps.).  It sounds
>likes it's just a polical thing (you know, make more money for MS instead of
>for IBM).

This is very insightful.

Let us be completely honest, folks.  Once you get past namecalling and
religion, when you tote up the proposed functionalities of OS/2 2.0 and Windows
NT, you find the two lists to be strikingly similar.  There are NO good,
fundamental, technical reasons to choose one over the other.  This is a war
which will be won entirely on the basis of religious grounds.

In fact, since OS/2 2.0 will be available some six months before Win NT (even
allowing for slips in both products), by all rights OS/2 should win out, and I
with some trepidation hereby predict it will do so.
-- 
timr@gss.com		Tim N Roberts, CCP	Graphic Software Systems
						Beaverton, OR
F U cn rd dis U mst uz Unix.

From: pierce@chips.com (John Pierce)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <3040@news.chips.com>
Date: 21 Aug 91 18:29:39 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp>
Followup-To: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Organization: Chips and Technologies, San Jose, CA
Lines: 24


In article <1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> dclayton@bcarh775.UUCP () writes:
>What exactly is the point of Windows 32 (or NT or whatever)?  It seems to do
>the same thing as OS/2 V 2.0 (multitask win 3.0 and DOS apps.).  It sounds
>likes it's just a polical thing (you know, make more money for MS instead of for
>IBM).  Any Ideas?  This is directed at those that have read the White Paper (save
>me from wasting any money downloading it if I don't need it).

Actually, nearly as I can tell, Win32 NT is actually a stripped OS/2 v{2|3}
with the PM API's ripped out and replaced with something closer to the Win API.
Having worked in both Win 1/2/3 and OS/2 1.1/1.2, I can say that neither is
perfect, but the PM API's are muddled up with WAY TOO MANY different ways to
do the same thing.  I mean do we really need 4 different kinds of presentation
spaces???  Do we need both paths and segments?  This is of course IMHO.

OS/2 does have a much better core than windows (which is of course, DOS) for
multitasking, but Windows has spent a lot more attention on the user interface,
not the API.  Take a look at Win 3.1 to see what I mean.  Users don't see APIs.


	John R Pierce			Dyslexic Atheists go to sleep
	pierce@chips.com		dreaming there is no DOG!!!
---------=========================================================-------------
As always, in case I am caught or killed, my employer will disavow
		all knowledge of my activities.

From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu>
Date: 21 Aug 91 23:31:54 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu>
	<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> <1991Aug21.164702.19620@gss.com>
Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Lines: 30
In-Reply-To: timr@gss.com's message of 21 Aug 91 16: 47:02 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws0.sys.cs.psu.edu



In article <1991Aug21.164702.19620@gss.com> timr@gss.com (Tim Roberts) writes:

   This is very insightful.

   Let us be completely honest, folks.  Once you get past namecalling and
   religion, when you tote up the proposed functionalities of OS/2 2.0 and Windows
   NT, you find the two lists to be strikingly similar.  There are NO good,
   fundamental, technical reasons to choose one over the other.  This is a war
   which will be won entirely on the basis of religious grounds.

   In fact, since OS/2 2.0 will be available some six months before Win NT (even
   allowing for slips in both products), by all rights OS/2 should win out, and I
   with some trepidation hereby predict it will do so.

OS/2 2.0 was suppose to be available last year.  A few months ago I
picked up a May issue of InfoWorld and started reading about how OS/2
2.0 might be out in December.  Something sounded funny in the article
so I looked at the date.  It was May 1990!  Microsoft is going to
screw IBM big time.  OS/2 2.0 won't run applications written for 3.1.
There are 200 additional function calls that OS/2 won't support.

-Mike

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    | "Medicine will cure death and
melling@cs.psu.edu                  |  government will repeal taxes
melling@vivaldi.psu.edu (NeXT mail) |  before Steve [Jobs] will fail."
                                    |                         Guy Kawasaki

From: nitin@ingres.com (Nitin Borwankar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.programmer,comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug22.193833.2284@pony.Ingres.COM>
Date: 22 Aug 91 19:38:33 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> <1991Aug21.164702.19620@gss.com>
Reply-To: nitin@Ingres.COM (Nitin Borwankar)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Lines: 64


In article <1991Aug21.164702.19620@gss.com> timr@gss.com (Tim Roberts) writes:
>In article <1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> dclayton@bcarh775.UUCP () writes:
>>What exactly is the point of Windows 32 (or NT or whatever)?  It seems to do
>>the same thing as OS/2 V 2.0 (multitask win 3.0 and DOS apps.).  It sounds
>>likes it's just a polical thing (you know, make more money for MS instead of
>>for IBM).
>
>This is very insightful.
>
>Let us be completely honest, folks.  Once you get past namecalling and
>religion, when you tote up the proposed functionalities of OS/2 2.0 and Windows
>NT, you find the two lists to be strikingly similar.  There are NO good,
>fundamental, technical reasons to choose one over the other.  This is a war
>which will be won entirely on the basis of religious grounds.

[...]Stuff Deleted>-- 
>timr@gss.com		Tim N Roberts, CCP	Graphic Software Systems

At this point it may be important to consider a very important set of
NON-TECHNICAL but very fundamental factors -

1) Price
2) Availability of tools / price of tools
3) Support to individual developers. 
4) Price of support.

Historically, both Microsoft and IBM have been insensitive to these factors
while claiming all kinds of technological miracles on white-papers,press
releases,... which amount unrealized wish-lists.

This is why Borland, a company that has technology + unrivalled support of
items 1) thru 4) above, has risen to where it is now.

Now as far as the OS/2 2.0 vs WIN NT debate :-

Today IBM has begun to see the market from the customer's point of view.
I say this only based on the fact that I hear far more encouraging noises
from the IBM'ers on the net and also from evidence like prices/ upgrade 
policy for OS2 2.0 etc. 
As a person who buys a lot of development tools out of my own pocket, the
only affordable high quality development tools I have been able to buy so
far have been Borland's. Now IBM appears to be ready to recognize the
existence of individuals. This makes me want to give IBM a second chance.

Microsoft on the other hand has created a white-paper that says nothing
about the green paper that I will have to shell out for the NEW TECHNOLOGY
at perhaps double the price.  And then I wonder why it took Win3.0 so
long to take off ( not the SDK price or complexity of course ) ?

Technological factors may seem equal along with the marketing power of
both IBM and Microsoft.

Who will win ( no pun intended ! ) depends on who has factored individuals
into their equation.
So far IBM seems to be way ahead on that count ( talking about OS2 2.0 here )
and MICROSOFT is still in danger of running a new race the old way.

Nitin Borwankar.
ASK Computer Systems/ Ingres Products Division
Alameda, Ca USA
nitin@ingres.com

Of course this is my own opinion;companies dont have opinions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mikem@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug22.195808.18674@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com>
Date: 22 Aug 91 19:58:08 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> <3040@news.chips.com>
Sender: news@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com (News Master)
Reply-To: mikem@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com (Michael MacFaden)
Organization: ISSC  Development, Palo Alto
Lines: 18


In article <3040@news.chips.com> pierce@chips.com (John Pierce) writes:
>  I mean do we really need 4 different kinds of presentation
>spaces???  Do we need both paths and segments?  This is of course IMHO.

John, there are only 3 types of PS. See May 1988 issue of the Microsoft
Systems Journal (pg 9) for a very lucid explanation by Charles Petzold on:
  cached- micro-PS
  micro-PS
  Normal-PS

I'm glad OS/2 offers this rich functionality. I makes Windows look pretty
weak...

mike

Michael R. MacFaden    IBM Palo Alto     Marketing Systems
mikem@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com, macfaden@paloic1.vnet.ibm.com 
disclaimer:  what I write above is not necessarily my employer's opinion 

From: mikem@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug22.200542.18931@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com>
Date: 22 Aug 91 20:05:42 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> <1991Aug21.164702.19620@gss.com> 
<0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu>
Sender: news@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com (News Master)
Reply-To: mikem@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com (Michael MacFaden)
Organization: IBM AWD Development, Palo Alto
Lines: 12


In article <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
OS/2 2.0 develpers and MS developers are really in a great competitive battle,
and the customer may win. I don't see MS "screwing" IBM as you put it.

I do see each shop really going after the customers who don't care
if one use the Win API or PM...just as long as it runs, does it without
UAE's or TRAP D's, it prints, and it is within budget...


Michael R. MacFaden    IBM Palo Alto     Marketing Systems
mikem@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com, macfaden@paloic1.vnet.ibm.com 
disclaimer:  what I write above is not necessarily my employer's opinion 

From: phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug22.211639.21531@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 22 Aug 91 21:16:39 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> <1991Aug21.164702.19620@gss.com> 
<0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu>
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 22


melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:

>OS/2 2.0 was suppose to be available last year.  A few months ago I
>picked up a May issue of InfoWorld and started reading about how OS/2
>2.0 might be out in December.  Something sounded funny in the article
>so I looked at the date.  It was May 1990!  Microsoft is going to
>screw IBM big time.  OS/2 2.0 won't run applications written for 3.1.
>There are 200 additional function calls that OS/2 won't support.
           ^^^
Why so damned many?

How about RAPIFCSA?

(Reduced Application Program Interface Function Call Set Architecture)

I'm starting to be worried that this API is going to collapse under its
own weight.
-- 
 /*********************************************************************\
/ Phil Howard -- KA9WGN -- phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu   |  "The problem with \
\ depending on government is that you cannot depend on it" - Tony Brown /
 \*********************************************************************/

From: alcocer@parc.xerox.com (Dario Alcocer)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <alcocer.682964803@nestea>
Date: 23 Aug 91 16:26:43 GMT
References: <1991Aug18.215634.820@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9137@vela.acs.oakland.edu> 
<1991Aug20.172810.15594@bigsur.uucp> <1991Aug21.164702.19620@gss.com> 
<0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> <1991Aug22.211639.21531@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@parc.xerox.com
Organization: Xerox PARC
Lines: 24



  phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN) writes:
    >melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
    >>OS/2 2.0 was suppose to be available last year.  A few months ago I
    >>picked up a May issue of InfoWorld and started reading about how OS/2
    >>2.0 might be out in December.  Something sounded funny in the article
    >>so I looked at the date.  It was May 1990!  Microsoft is going to
    >>screw IBM big time.  OS/2 2.0 won't run applications written for 3.1.
    >>There are 200 additional function calls that OS/2 won't support.
  >             ^^^
  >Why so damned many? How about RAPIFCSA? (Reduced Application Program
  >Interface Function Call Set Architecture)
 
  >I'm starting to be worried that this API is going to collapse under its
  >own weight.

Amen. At present, the Windows API has some 550 function calls (according to
Petzold), with some of them (e.g. Escape()) having several function
codes.  With 200 new calls, seems like the need to abstract some of
this detail will become more important.  Maybe some enterprising young
programmer will come up with a RAPIFCSA and make some $$$ (maybe)...

--
Dario Alcocer
alcocer@parc.xerox.com

From: larrys@watson.ibm.com (Larry Salomon, Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug26.202613.27028@watson.ibm.com>
Date: 26 Aug 91 16:22:51 GMT
References: <1991Aug20.220312.7001@hyper.hyper.com>
Sender: larrys@yktvmv
Reply-To: larrys@watson.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Watson OS/2 Applications and Tools
Lines: 14
News-Software: NewsKit 1.2 - LaMail
Nntp-Posting-Host: ibmman2
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM


In <1991Aug20.220312.7001@hyper.hyper.com>, bonneau@hyper.hyper.com (Paul Bonneau) 
writes:
> <Much stuff about NT deleted>

Of course this all assumes that NT will actually bring this exciting
technology to bear.  Alpha demonstrations do not count.

OS/2 2.0 is available NOW.  Granted, it is still in beta test, but it
will (it better) be GA in 4Q91.  'Nuff said.

Cheers,
Larry Salomon, Jr. (aka 'Q')            LARRYS@YKTVMV.BITNET
OS/2 Applications and Tools             larrys@ibmman.watson.ibm.com
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center         larrys@eng.clemson.edu
Yorktown Heights, NY

From: larrys@watson.ibm.com (Larry Salomon, Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com>
Date: 26 Aug 91 16:39:56 GMT
References: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu>
Sender: larrys@yktvmv
Reply-To: larrys@watson.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Watson OS/2 Applications and Tools
Lines: 44
News-Software: NewsKit 1.2 - LaMail
Nntp-Posting-Host: ibmman2
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM


In <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
>OS/2 2.0 was suppose to be available last year.  A few months ago I
>picked up a May issue of InfoWorld and started reading about how OS/2
>2.0 might be out in December.  Something sounded funny in the article
>so I looked at the date.  It was May 1990!  Microsoft is going to
>screw IBM big time.  OS/2 2.0 won't run applications written for 3.1.
>There are 200 additional function calls that OS/2 won't support.

Lemme ask you a question:  do you know WHY OS/2 2.0 won't run Windows 3.1
applications?  I was told by some VERY reliable people that Windows 3.1
will NOT run Windows 3.0 applications, which MIGHT cause problems for
OS/2 (but I dare say that it will piss off more Windows users that OS/2
users).  Let me emphasize that I have no confirmation about this and it
should be viewed strictly as a rumor and not as having any factual
content (not yet, at least...  :) .

However, you will also need to keep in mind that IBM does have access to
the Windows 3.1 source code and it is entirely possible that OS/2 2.0
will have it integrated along with the ability to run 3.0 and 2.x Windows
applications.

:supposition remark='lots of ifs'.

Now assuming that all of this is indeed true, let's look at the
ramifications:

OS/2 2.0 will run Windows 2.x (darn if I can't remember what 'x' is.  I
think it is '1') and 3.0 applications, and possibly 3.1 applications.

Windows 3.1 will run Windows 3.1 applications.

If you are a user will a gazillion dollars invested in Windows
3.0 software (now that it is so proliferant), AND you know it will take
some time to get 3.1 versions (if it will be upgraded at all), AND OS/2
2.0 will run Windows 3.0 (and 3.1 for the sake of argument), do you think
you'll use Windows 3.1 or OS/2 2.0???

:esupposition.

Cheers,
Larry Salomon, Jr. (aka 'Q')            LARRYS@YKTVMV.BITNET
OS/2 Applications and Tools             larrys@ibmman.watson.ibm.com
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center         larrys@eng.clemson.edu
Yorktown Heights, NY

From: larrys@watson.ibm.com (Larry Salomon, Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug27.165927.8235@watson.ibm.com>
Date: 27 Aug 91 10:56:57 GMT
References: <a=aHloz42@cs.psu.edu>
Sender: larrys@yktvmv
Reply-To: larrys@watson.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Research
Lines: 19
News-Software: NewsKit 1.2 - LaMail
Nntp-Posting-Host: ibmman2
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM


In <a=aHloz42@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
>
> <stuff deleted>
>
>I'm almost positive that Windows 3.1 will run Windows 3.0 software.
>Is IBM spreading rumors?

No, IBM is/was not.  I am/was...  :)

Cheers,
Larry Salomon, Jr. (aka 'Q')            LARRYS@YKTVMV.BITNET
OS/2 Applications and Tools             larrys@ibmman.watson.ibm.com
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center         larrys@eng.clemson.edu
Yorktown Heights, NY

Disclaimer:  The statements and/or opinions stated above are strictly my
own and do not reflect the views of my employer.  Additionally, I have a
reputation for being obnoxious, so don't take any personal attacks too
seriously.

From: john@utafll.uta.edu (John Baima)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <JOHN.91Aug27064309@utafll.utafll.uta.edu>
Date: 27 Aug 91 11:43:09 GMT
References: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com>
Sender: usenet@cse.uta.edu (USENET Dummy account for GNUS and TheNews)
Organization: UTexas at Arlington, Linguistics
Lines: 19
In-Reply-To: larrys@watson.ibm.com's message of 26 Aug 91 21:39:56 GMT



Larry writes:

   Lemme ask you a question:  do you know WHY OS/2 2.0 won't run Windows 3.1
   applications?  I was told by some VERY reliable people that Windows 3.1
   will NOT run Windows 3.0 applications, which MIGHT cause problems for
   OS/2 (but I dare say that it will piss off more Windows users that OS/2
   users).  Let me emphasize that I have no confirmation about this and it
   should be viewed strictly as a rumor and not as having any factual
   content (not yet, at least...  :) .

Windows 3.1 will not run Win 2.x apps--no real mode in Win 3.1. I have
heard that MS may change Win 3.1 so that it is no longer a DPMI
client. Besides trying to screw IBM, I can see no reason for this and
if they do this, this could cause problems for lots of apps, except
MS's. Where is the FTC???
--
John Baima
john@utafll.uta.edu

From: johns@csd.uwo.ca (John Strybosch)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <4344@julian.uwo.ca>
Date: 27 Aug 91 15:44:02 GMT
References: <1991Aug20.220312.7001@hyper.hyper.com> 
<1991Aug22.210126.19023@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1991Aug23.030145.28442@hyper.hyper.com>
Sender: news@julian.uwo.ca
Followup-To: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Lines: 17


I've been told, (with all the emotional stuff around this issue I find
anything anyone says hard to believe) that developers of Win 3.1 applications
will be able to ship DLL's that allow 3.0 users to run their programs.  If
this is true there will be even less reason for people to upgrade to 3.1
_and_ if OS/2's windows compatibility is completely compatible with Win 3.0
DLL's then OS/2 2.0 should be able to run these same applications.

If these DLL's are designed specifically not to work with OS/2 2.0 I'm sure
the FTC would be interested.

The way I see it is that we can't trust anything we hear until we have
actual product releases.  I'm still waiting for DOS 5.0's promised
reentrancy... I think people were claiming this around the OS/2 1.3
release.  

JJ Strybosch
Just me.

From: steveha@microsoft.com (Steve Hastings)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug28.024744.9252@microsoft.com>
Date: 28 Aug 91 02:47:44 GMT
References: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com> 
<JOHN.91Aug27064309@utafll.utafll.uta.edu>
Reply-To: steveha@microsoft.UUCP (Steve Hastings)
Organization: Microsoft International Products Group
Lines: 37



Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with Windows development, and I find out
rumors about Windows development the same place you do -- _PC Week_ and
_Infoworld_.


In article <JOHN.91Aug27064309@utafll.utafll.uta.edu> john@utafll.uta.edu 
(John Baima) writes:
>Windows 3.1 will not run Win 2.x apps--no real mode in Win 3.1.

No problem.  Run a DOS shell, and inside that run Windows 2.X, or
Windows 3.0 with the /r option.  I used to do this all the time when I
first got Win 3.0.


>I have heard that MS may change Win 3.1 so that it is no longer a DPMI
>client. Besides trying to screw IBM, I can see no reason for this and
>if they do this, this could cause problems for lots of apps, except MS's.

I have heard that Win 3.0 is not a DPMI client; it must be the server.  I
have heard that MS was planning to make Win 3.1 a DPMI client, but I
haven't heard any rumor that they had succeeded.  If Win 3.1 is not a DPMI
client, it is not a "change" from Win 3.0.  I also don't understand how
lack of a DPMI client can "cause problems for lots of apps".

Since I have nothing to do with Windows development, I don't know the truth
about how easy or hard DPMI client status would be, or on whether it is or
is not planned.  But I'm not as sure as you seem to be that MS is trying to
play Machiavellian politics.


>Where is the FTC???

Breathing hot down Microsoft's neck.  With all the attention MS is getting
from the FTC already, I don't think MS will do anything stupid.  You'll have
to decide for yourself what you think.
-- 
Steve "I don't speak for Microsoft" Hastings    ===^=== :::::
uunet!microsoft!steveha  steveha@microsoft.uucp    ` \\==|

From: steveha@microsoft.com (Steve Hastings)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug28.025340.9402@microsoft.com>
Date: 28 Aug 91 02:53:40 GMT
References: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com>
Reply-To: steveha@microsoft.UUCP (Steve Hastings)
Organization: Microsoft International Products Group
Lines: 12


In article <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com> larrys@watson.ibm.com writes:
>I was told by some VERY reliable people that Windows 3.1
>will NOT run Windows 3.0 applications
 
>Let me emphasize that I have no confirmation about this and it
>should be viewed strictly as a rumor and not as having any factual
>content (not yet, at least...  :) .


Nonsense.  I have seen Windows 3.1 running unmodified Win 3.0 apps.
-- 
Steve "I don't speak for Microsoft" Hastings    ===^=== :::::
uunet!microsoft!steveha  steveha@microsoft.uucp    ` \\==|

From: timr@gss.com (Tim Roberts)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Summary: Reality Check, Please?
Message-ID: <1991Aug28.164710.22185@gss.com>
Date: 28 Aug 91 16:47:10 GMT
References: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com> 
<JOHN.91Aug27064309@utafll.utafll.uta.edu>
Organization: Graphic Software Systems, Beaverton, OR
Lines: 53


In article <JOHN.91Aug27064309@utafll.utafll.uta.edu> john@utafll.uta.edu 
(John Baima) writes:
>
>Larry writes:
>
>   Lemme ask you a question:  do you know WHY OS/2 2.0 won't run Windows 3.1
>   applications?  I was told by some VERY reliable people that Windows 3.1
>   will NOT run Windows 3.0 applications, which MIGHT cause problems for
>   OS/2 (but I dare say that it will piss off more Windows users that OS/2
>   users).  Let me emphasize that I have no confirmation about this and it
>   should be viewed strictly as a rumor and not as having any factual
>   content (not yet, at least...  :) .
>
>Windows 3.1 will not run Win 2.x apps--no real mode in Win 3.1. I have
>heard that MS may change Win 3.1 so that it is no longer a DPMI
>client. Besides trying to screw IBM, I can see no reason for this and
>if they do this, this could cause problems for lots of apps, except
>MS's. Where is the FTC???

I cannot believe the CRAP that is flying around this group!  Don't you people 
do a reality check before posting?

Win 3.1 will, of course, run Win 3.0 apps.  Win 3.1 has been in Beta for some
period of time.  If the Beta testers HAD run across something this radical,
Microsoft engineers would have fixed it post haste.  Microsoft is in the
business of making money.  Screwing Win 3.0 apps would NOT make money.

Larry Solomon's statement to the contrary above is NOTHING more than outhouse
fodder, and I cannot accept that Larry himself believes it.  And, although I
usually enjoy his ranting and raving, it is my opinion that this particular
misstatement borders on illegal.  Despite disclaimers to the contrary, Larry,
your postings contain an IBM signature, and you are acting as an IBM 
spokesperson.

As to the second point, remember that Microsoft got a lot of bad press because
they made Windows a DPMI client rather than a VCPI client.  They are merely
caving in to popular demand.  Win will continue to act as a DPMI server once 
everything has been allocated.  Why do you think this will "screw IBM" or 
"cause problems for lots of apps"?

#include <soapbox_init.h>

Can we take a step backwards for a moment here?  Neither Microsoft nor IBM is
operated or staffed by little children.  These are profit-oriented companies
run by intelligent people.  Neither company is going to do anything radically
stupid.  Win 3.1 will work.  OS/2 2.0 will work.  NT will work.  Can we quit
the namecalling and rumormongering, at least until a new batch of freshmen
descends upon the net in another month?

#include <soapbox_term.h>
-- 
timr@gss.com		Tim N Roberts, CCP	Graphic Software Systems
						Beaverton, OR
F U cn rd dis U mst uz Unix.

From: sip1@quads.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug28.190802.24951@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 28 Aug 91 19:08:02 GMT
References: <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com> 
<JOHN.91Aug27064309@utafll.utafll.uta.edu> <1991Aug28.024744.9252@microsoft.com>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (NewsMistress)
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 10


In article <1991Aug28.024744.9252@microsoft.com> steveha@microsoft.UUCP 
(Steve Hastings) writes:
>>[Windows 3.1 will lack real mode and will not run Windows 2.x apps...]
>No problem.  Run a DOS shell, and inside that run Windows 2.X, or
>Windows 3.0 with the /r option.  I used to do this all the time when I
>first got Win 3.0.

Yep.  That tactic should be swifter than a turtle going to an oral surgeon.

T.F.S.
Timothy F. Sipples				sip1@quads.uchicago.edu

From: larrys@watson.ibm.com (Larry Salomon, Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug29.130110.13572@watson.ibm.com>
Date: 29 Aug 91 06:56:37 GMT
References: <1991Aug28.164710.22185@gss.com>
Sender: larrys@yktvmv
Reply-To: larrys@watson.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Watson OS/2 Applications and Tools
Lines: 21
News-Software: NewsKit 1.2 - LaMail
Nntp-Posting-Host: ibmman2
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM


In <1991Aug28.164710.22185@gss.com>, timr@gss.com (Tim Roberts) writes:
>
> <stuff deleted>
>
>Larry Solomon's statement to the contrary above is NOTHING more than outhouse
>fodder, and I cannot accept that Larry himself believes it.  And, although I
>usually enjoy his ranting and raving, it is my opinion that this particular
>misstatement borders on illegal.  Despite disclaimers to the contrary, Larry,
>your postings contain an IBM signature, and you are acting as an IBM
>spokesperson.

I agree.  Sorry folks for the "outhouse fodder" I posted.  I guess I was
looking for a way to say "I told you so" (actually, this conference
hasn't had anything good to fight about lately, so I wanted to be a
provider...*big grin*).  Ah me...

Cheers,
Larry Salomon, Jr. (aka 'Q')            LARRYS@YKTVMV.BITNET
OS/2 Applications and Tools             larrys@watson.ibm.com
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center         larrys@ibmman.watson.ibm.com
Yorktown Heights, NY                    larrys@ibmman2.watson.ibm.com


From: sidney@borland.com (Sidney Markowitz)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug29.163020.18556@borland.com>
Date: 29 Aug 91 16:30:20 GMT
References: <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com> 
<JOHN.91Aug27064309@utafll.utafll.uta.edu> <1991Aug28.164710.22185@gss.com>
Organization: Borland International
Lines: 19


In article <1991Aug28.164710.22185@gss.com> timr@gss.com (Tim Roberts) writes:
> [...] These are profit-oriented companies
>run by intelligent people.  Neither company is going to do anything radically
>stupid.  Win 3.1 will work.  OS/2 2.0 will work.  NT will work.

That doesn't follow. Better predictions would be: Win 3.1 will be
sold.  OS/2 2.0 will be sold. NT will be hyped and might be sold if
market conditions warrant and there is something to put in a box
labelled "NT".

Neither the lessons of history nor the implications of the profit
motive indicate that we can expect shipping, selling products to work
well, nor that Microsoft will necessarily follow through on strategic
directions that they are announcing now. We can predict that both
companies will continue to try to make money, and probably in ways
similar to those they have followed in the past.

 -- sidney markowitz <sidney@borland.com>
    (*not* speaking for my employer!)

From: CATHIE@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <91241.115502CATHIE@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: 29 Aug 91 19:55:02 GMT
References: <1CE00001.e5aanf@tbomb.ice.com>
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Lines: 3


One vote for Larry.  I've found his postings informative, thought provoking,
and stimulating.  He corrected himself in his typical forthright manner.  I
can allow people to make mistakes.

From: rdthomps@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Robert D. Thompson)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <9458@vela.acs.oakland.edu>
Date: 30 Aug 91 04:52:21 GMT
References: <1CE00001.e5aanf@tbomb.ice.com> 
<91241.115502CATHIE@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Lines: 24


In article <91241.115502CATHIE@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> 
CATHIE@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU writes:
>One vote for Larry.  I've found his postings informative, thought provoking,
>and stimulating.  He corrected himself in his typical forthright manner.  I
>can allow people to make mistakes.

	Might you reference these.

	I don't like getting personal on people, but there has been a
	serious upswing (read effort) by individuals that I have seen
	for weeks in the comp.os.os2... group, posting malicious comments
	to this group.

	I'm sure we all forgive Larry - that is, if he and others
	don't "Think out Loud"

	By the way, I don't think we are voting to crucify Larry.
	Rather to comment on the nature of his postings.

	Regards

---
Robert D. Thompson
rdthomps@vela.acs.oakland.edu
"Read my MIPS, no new VAXES!" - George Bush after sniffing freon

From: alistair@microsoft.com (Alistair BANKS)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug30.215107.21654@microsoft.com>
Date: 30 Aug 91 21:51:07 GMT
References: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com>
Reply-To: alistair@microsoft.UUCP (Alistair BANKS)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 5


Windows 3.1 will run Windows 3.0 applications. If anyone on the Windows 3.1
beta finds a Windows 3.0 app which has problems, please report those as
bugs to be fixed. This is unequivocal.

Alistair Banks, Microsoft System Division.

Path: gmdzi!unido!unidui!math.fu-berlin.de!fauern!iraun1.ira.uka.de!
sol.ctr.columbia.edu!samsung!uunet!microsoft!alistair
From: alist...@microsoft.com (Alistair BANKS)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug30.215734.21806@microsoft.com>
Date: 30 Aug 91 21:57:34 GMT
References: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com> 
<JOHN.91Aug27064309@utafll.utafll.uta.edu>
Reply-To: alist...@microsoft.UUCP (Alistair BANKS)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 15

In article <JOHN.91Aug27064...@utafll.utafll.uta.edu> j...@utafll.uta.edu 
(John Baima) writes:
>I have
>heard that MS may change Win 3.1 so that it is no longer a DPMI
>client. Besides trying to screw IBM, I can see no reason for this and
>if they do this, this could cause problems for lots of apps, except
>MS's. Where is the FTC???
>--

Windows 3.1, like Windows 3.0 will run DPMI Client applications. There
is no chnage in this area. Neither Windows 3.0, nor Windows 3.1 is a
DPMI client itself, so neither Windows 3.0 nor Windows 3.1 will run
on a DPMI server. No problems are introduced for applications which
exist today. The FTC is in Washington DC.

Alistair Banks, Microsoft Systems Division.

From: alistair@microsoft.com (Alistair BANKS)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug30.223752.22624@microsoft.com>
Date: 30 Aug 91 22:37:52 GMT
References: <1991Aug20.220312.7001@hyper.hyper.com> 
<1991Aug22.210126.19023@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1991Aug23.030145.28442@hyper.hyper.com> 
<4344@julian.uwo.ca>
Reply-To: alistair@microsoft.UUCP (Alistair BANKS)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 51


In article <4344@julian.uwo.ca> johns@csd.uwo.ca (John Strybosch) writes:
>I've been told, (with all the emotional stuff around this issue I find
>anything anyone says hard to believe) that developers of Win 3.1 applications
>will be able to ship DLL's that allow 3.0 users to run their programs.  If
>this is true there will be even less reason for people to upgrade to 3.1
>_and_ if OS/2's windows compatibility is completely compatible with Win 3.0
>DLL's then OS/2 2.0 should be able to run these same applications.

Specifically, three major groups of .dlls can be shipped to work on
Windows 3.0 - these deliver some of the WIndows 3.1 functionality on
Windows 3.0 and can be shipped by developersISVs with their applications.

The three are DDEML.dll - this implements the Windows 3.1 DDE API - the
OLE Client & Server .dlls - these implement the Windows 3.1 OLE APIs, and
the common dialog .dll which implements the Windows 3.1 standard File.Open,
File.Save, Printer.Setup and other Dialogs.

Windows 3.1 implements more improvements than mentioned here, and not
all of those could be applied to Win3.0 - TrueType is one such example,
which to execute efficiently in both the system and the drivers, required
enginerring directly into GDI. It therefore doesnt work on Windows 3.0.
There are other such features which fall into this catagory.

We invite all people potentially interested in beta testing Windows 3.1
to download the wn31be.zip file with anonymous ftp from uunet.uu.net in
our ~ftp/vendor/microsoft/isv-communications directory. People who dont
have ftp access, can try mailing the proxy-ftp server at Princeton, a copy
of their help intro paragraphs are below.

Alistair Banks, Microsoft Systems Division.

**********************************************************************


               BITFTP -- Princeton BITNET FTP Server

BITFTP provides a mail interface to the FTP portion of the IBM
TCP/IP product ("FAL") running on the Princeton VM system, to allow
BITNET/NetNorth/EARN users to ftp files from sites on the Internet.

To use BITFTP, send mail containing your ftp commands to BITFTP@PUCC
(or to BITFTP@PUCC.Princeton.edu).

The first command to BITFTP must be "FTP", "FTPLIST", "HELP", or
"VMS".  If you send BITFTP mail or a message containing only the
command "FTPLIST", it will send you a list of some of the hosts that
allow anonymous ftp.  (Note that there is no guarantee that BITFTP
can access all the hosts in that list.)  Use "HELP" to request a
current copy of this help file.  Use "VMS" to request a collection
of tips provided by BITFTP users on how to handle binary files from
BITFTP on VMS systems.

From: alcocer@parc.xerox.com (Dario Alcocer)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <alcocer.683613847@nestea>
Date: 31 Aug 91 04:44:07 GMT
References: <0m2Hj9d02@cs.psu.edu> <1991Aug26.204900.28160@watson.ibm.com> 
<a=aHloz42@cs.psu.edu> <3661@unccvax.uncc.edu> 
<1991Aug30.210047.25687@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@parc.xerox.com
Organization: Xerox PARC
Lines: 27


aaron@jessica.stanford.edu (Aaron Wallace) writes:
>I agree.  Personally I like tons of calls--the more the merrier.  I think
>there should be more.  As an example, there's a Get[Private]ProfileInt,
>but no Write[Private]ProfileInt.  And there's EnableWindow, but no
>EnableDlgItem.  Redundant, to be sure, but consider: if it's in the API,
>it's in the Windows DLLs and is shared code.  If each developer has to
>crank out his/her own version, then you're using more memory than should
>have to be used.

I agree with you in _principle_, but not necessarily in practice.  I
think the point needs to be made, as a colleague of mine mentioned
when I discussed it, is that Windows needs to be more than just a
set of function calls, without any logical cohesion of some kind.
I agree, the developer should see the commonly-needed functionality
present in Windows to help stave off app bloating.  One needs to think
how the new API calls will help in eliminating or reducing the need
to be heavily dependent on knowledge of the internals of Windows
to build apps (e.g. need to know about: only 8K selector, 64K bitmaps
not always working, the various limits on resource limits, obscure
function call sequences, etc.)

You're on the mark IMHO on the need to improve system resource
managment.  We just need to remember that more is always not better.

--
Dario Alcocer      | Internet: alcocer@parc.xerox.com
Xerox Corporation  | tel:      +1 415 494-4851

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!utgpu!cunews!nrcnet0!bnrgate!
bigsur!bcarh775!dclayton
From: dclay...@bcarh775.bnr.ca (Don Clayton)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 32 White Paper: As given out at Win3.1 conference
Message-ID: <1991Aug31.200943.12635@bigsur.uucp>
Date: 31 Aug 91 20:09:43 GMT
References: <1CE00001.e5aanf@tbomb.ice.com> 
<91241.115502CATHIE@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> <9458@vela.acs.oakland.edu>
Sender: n...@bigsur.uucp
Reply-To: dclay...@bcarh775.UUCP ()
Organization: BNR Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 36

>>In article <91241.115502CAT...@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> 
CAT...@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU writes:
>>One vote for Larry.  I've found his postings informative, thought provoking,
>>and stimulating.  He corrected himself in his typical forthright manner.  I
>>can allow people to make mistakes.

>	Might you reference these.

>	I don't like getting personal on people, but there has been a
>	serious upswing (read effort) by individuals that I have seen
>	for weeks in the comp.os.os2... group, posting malicious comments
>	to this group.

>	I'm sure we all forgive Larry - that is, if he and others
>	don't "Think out Loud"

>	By the way, I don't think we are voting to crucify Larry.
>	Rather to comment on the nature of his postings.

>	Regards

>---
>Robert D. Thompson
>rdtho...@vela.acs.oakland.edu
>"Read my MIPS, no new VAXES!" - George Bush after sniffing freon

Ah, America home of the free and the brave.  Did you hear that a version of Websters
is going to be banded (if the protesters have their way).  Why don't we ban all IBMer's 
from the net because they don't like MS.  As the man's disclosure says "These opinions
are not IBM's, they're mine".  READ IT (and don't send mail to BNR saying their
spokesperson on the net is spreading rummors, because I'm NOT THIER SPOKESPERSON!)

Don
#include <stddisclosure>
Superman never made any money saving the world from Solomon Grundy - Crash Test Dummies
- NO I didn't get the Crash Test Dummies to sign a contract to allow me to quote them.
In Canada we can do these things without getting sued.

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!bywater!arnor!yktvmv!larrys
From: lar...@watson.ibm.com (Larry Salomon, Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Larry is F(l)amous
Message-ID: <1991Sep3.134940.28481@watson.ibm.com>
Date: 3 Sep 91 07:40:48 GMT
References: <1991Aug31.200943.12635@bigsur.uucp>
Sender: larrys@yktvmv
Reply-To: lar...@watson.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Research
Lines: 58
News-Software: NewsKit 1.2 - LaMail
Nntp-Posting-Host: ibmman2
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM

In <1991Aug31.200943.12...@bigsur.uucp>, dclay...@bcarh775.bnr.ca (Don Clayton) 
writes:
>
>>>In article <91241.115502CAT...@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> CAT...@SLACVM.SLAC.ST
>ANFORD.EDU writes:
>>>One vote for Larry.  I've found his postings informative, thought provoking,
>>>and stimulating.  He corrected himself in his typical forthright manner.  I
>>>can allow people to make mistakes.
>
>>       Might you reference these.
>
>>       I don't like getting personal on people, but there has been a
>>       serious upswing (read effort) by individuals that I have seen
>>       for weeks in the comp.os.os2... group, posting malicious comments
>>       to this group.
>
>>       I'm sure we all forgive Larry - that is, if he and others
>>       don't "Think out Loud"
>
>>       By the way, I don't think we are voting to crucify Larry.
>>       Rather to comment on the nature of his postings.
>
>Ah, America home of the free and the brave.  Did you hear that a version of Webs
>ters
>is going to be banded (if the protesters have their way).  Why don't we ban all
>IBMer's
>from the net because they don't like MS.  As the man's disclosure says "These op
>inions
>are not IBM's, they're mine".  READ IT (and don't send mail to BNR saying their
>spokesperson on the net is spreading rummors, because I'm NOT THIER SPOKESPERSON
>!)

Eeesh...How loud do I have to say it?  I GOOFED!!!  Let's quit flaming
each other because someone had a valid complaint about my posting
material!!!

My obligatory OS/2 comment:

Coming soon to a news-server near you!  It's hot!  It's amazing!  "I
don't know how I lived without it", says John Doe of Walla Walla,
Washington.  "It's the most amazing thing since sliced bread", says Joe
Smith of Albequeque, New Mexico.  "But can it run Windows 3.1 apps?",
says John HALL of Redmond, Washington.  (I couldn't resist, John.
Please don't take that personally. :)

It's Larry's notes/seminar on enabling your application to print using
the Print Manager (Gpi primitives and bitmaps)!  Soon to be posted on
your local news-server!

Cheers,
Larry Salomon, Jr. (aka 'Q')            LAR...@YKTVMV.BITNET
OS/2 Applications and Tools             lar...@watson.ibm.com
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center         lar...@ibmman.watson.ibm.com
Yorktown Heights, NY                    lar...@ibmman2.watson.ibm.com

Disclaimer:  The statements and/or opinions stated above are strictly my
own and do not reflect the views of my employer.  Additionally, I have a
reputation for being obnoxious, so don't take any personal attacks too
seriously.

			        About USENET

USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.

		       SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM

March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State 
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, 
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM 
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of 
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services 
business. See SCO vs IBM.

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
research.

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com			  http://tech-insider.org/