Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!
news.belwue.de!news.dfn.de!scsing.switch.ch!swidir.switch.ch!
univ-lyon1.fr!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!
usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: ed.du...@lambada.oit.unc.edu ("Mr. Ed")
Subject: I SAW CHICAGO!
Message-ID: <940411170928@lambada>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Lines: 151
Date: 11 Apr 94 21:09:49 GMT
Saw this on comp.os.ms-windows.misc. Maybe it's of interest here. No
flames please!
While reading through the PC SIG on Delphi, I found this message
(thought it might be of interest to some people)
=======================================================================
Message Originally From MARK WEISS Forwarded, Retrieved from OUTDRS,
Conference 0042 - FI--WINDOW, #0001506 Message And Posted To ALL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I went to a Microsoft demonstration earlier this evening. I didn't
expect quite what I saw. I came out of there with my socks on FIRE! (an
understatement for "they knocked my socks off!!!)
The demo went from embarassingly poor to awesome beyond expectation, as
the started off with Windows for Workgroups and worked their way to NT
and finally Chicago.
I was unimpressed with WfWG 3.11. I don't know why they bothered showing
it. The little disk benchmark that compared 32-bit file access with
16-bit file access was a carefully-engineered setup which cannot be
realized with real applications of the mainstream types. The graphics
performance was terrible with 24-bit picture image redraws lasting 4-5
seconds or more. Enough of the crap. Let's move on to NT...
NT vs NT with Daytona: This was a speed improvement demo. They had 2
machines race each other, one with Daytona modified NT, the other with
plain ol' NT. The speed improvement was so obvious it bore no need to
mention. Then came the impressive part: 32-bit version of Micrografx
Picture Publisher. The guy loaded THREE 3-megabyte TIFF files --
simultaneously. They came up in perhaps 4-5 seconds. (486/66 w 32MB RAM)
He then had the program rotate one of the images and while that was
going on, he loaded MS Word 6.0 and opened a large document. (Oh, BTW,
whenever he moved a window across the screen, the contents never redrew
-- the window moved as one solid image, no frame then redraw here.) MS
Word 6 came up in TWO seconds flat. The console remained RESPONSIVE.
Next came NT on the SMP machine, a dual 486/66 with 32MB RAM. This is a
dream machine with NT-Daytona running on it. Picture Publisher again...
He clicked on FOUR image thumbnails (each scan being a 3-meg color scan)
in the OPEN dialogue and loaded them. In the count of TWO seconds, ALL
of them were loaded an instantly drawn on the screen! This operation
would take MINUTES under Win 3.1! He then proceded to rotate one of the
images to 24-degrees of angle and then ran another application and
showed that the system was instantaneous in its user responsiveness.
Now, the piece de resistance... Chicago was demonstrated. Single 486/66
CPU, 16 megs RAM. First, a tour of the desktop. All folders. Everywhere,
a folder. Folders inside of folders. It looked like a marriage of OS/2
and System 7 in appearance. There were various icons running vertically
up the wallpaper, and a bar at the bottom which contained
currently-running apps that could be called up at will. There was no
ProgMan or FileMan. All are rolled into an integrated unit. Very
customizable too. You could display folders, filenames, filenames with
long listings of attributes (which now include: creation date,
modification date and last-read dates!). Filenames can be 256 characters
long. DOS programs no longer require the PIF Editor. You right-click a
DOS app folder and the Properties dialogue appears, where you have a PIF
editor-like set of app behavior parameters.
PLUG 'N PLAY: At one point, this feature was demonstrated. He turned off
the machine, inserted a SCSI card in a slot, connected the SCSI cable to
an external hard drive and powered her up. We saw the usual BIOS POST
stuff, followed by SCSI ID stuff followed by "Loading Windows..." The
monitor blanked for a couple of seconds and a psuedo-animated 3D
"Chicago" logo appeared (along with a November 1993 copyright date). 5
seconds later, the desktop appeared with the NEW drive on it. Just to
prove the drive actually WORKS, he loaded the SAME Picture Publisher as
was running on NT. It came up in under 2 seconds. He did the same thing
he did on the NT machines -- he loaded a third of a dozen 3-meg images
at one time. They were loaded and on the screen before I knew what was
happening. He then started a print job. Next, he started a little
animated demo of some fast bezier curve drawing. He loaded 3 instances
of that. Back to Picture Publisher: he started a complex rotate on one
animating at all times and NEVER paused at any time. As he clicked on
another TIFF document window, that graphic appeared instantly and redrew
he showed us by bringing it to the front. I must emphasize that there
the multitasking capabilities of Chicago. It felt more like an SMP
machine than a single 486.
Then there was the MPEG video demonstration. They played a minute or so
of "The Fugitive" in a window. "Big deal" I muttered "it's in a small
Movement was smooth at 30fps and sound was playing back too. (BTW, they
average theater and the projection system with the MPEG video rivaled
theater quality images for detail and clarity.)
They ran a "BadApp" designed to hose the system with a GPF. It affected
none of the running processes. None of the systems crashed or glitched
during the entire evening.
On the NT machine, the other guy opened FIVE movie clips and tiled them
about the screen. All were playing smoothly. As he moved them about the
screen and arranged the layout, I noticed that the video was still in
motion AS THE WINDOW WAS BEING DRAGGED ACROSS THE SCREEN.
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions:
Chicago has Assembler code in critical areas to enhance performance. NT
does not (in order to be cross-platform portable).
Chicago will SMOOTHLY multitask while you write to or format floppies.
Chicago will not limit your "system resource".
Chicago will replace Windows and DOS, although you can still do a
dual-boot setup if you really want to (I don't know who would though,
after tasting Chicago).
Chicago will run as fast or faster than Windows 3.1 on a 4 MB machine.
Chicago's speed will increase at a greater rate than Windows 3.1 will,
as you increase installed RAM.
Chicago is compatable with all the current apps you own, all the device
drivers you now use and all your hardware.
Chicago will cost UNDER $100.
Chicago will ship "second half of 1994".
To benefit from the multithreading capability (ie., to do the amazing
stuff that they did in Picture Publisher) you need to run versions of
your apps that are specifically written for Chicago. These will probably
be available as upgrades as soon as Chicago ships.
Chicago can run DOOM in a DOS window.
Chicago features a color matching system for achieving the same color
fidelity on screen and color printers.
========================================================================
I walked in a mild skeptic and walked out realizing that: OS/2 is dead,
Macintosh is dead and even NeXTStep is seriously-threatened by the
awesome capabilities of Chicago. I am totally convinced that this
version is so revolutionary it even overshadows the contrast of Windows
vs. DOS 1.0. MS did their homework on this one and it shows. No smoke
and mirrors, they showed us REAL applications that ran FAST.
===========================================================================
That was the full message posted on Delphi...No, I didn't write the last
paragraph...it was forwared with that in it. The person who forwarded the
message to the PC SIG got some angry replys concerning the last paragraph.
Ed
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: gmd.de!urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de!newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de!
ina.zfn.uni-bremen.de!marvin.pc-labor.uni-bremen.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!
rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!
news.tamu.edu!news.utdallas.edu!corpgate!bnrgate!bnr.co.uk!uknet!cf-cm!
cybaswan!iiitac
From: iii...@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: I SAW CHICAGO!
Message-ID: <1994Apr12.093315.7085@uk.ac.swan.pyr>
Organization: Swansea University College
References: <940411170928@lambada>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 09:33:15 GMT
Lines: 114
In article <940411170928@lambada> ed.du...@lambada.oit.unc.edu ("Mr. Ed")
writes:
>Saw this on comp.os.ms-windows.misc. Maybe it's of interest here. No
>flames please!
Chuckle.. Its amazing how much people can be confused by a good marketroid
>mention. Then came the impressive part: 32-bit version of Micrografx
>Picture Publisher. The guy loaded THREE 3-megabyte TIFF files --
>simultaneously. They came up in perhaps 4-5 seconds. (486/66 w 32MB RAM)
Quick timing suggests Linux with cluster on a decent disk also has no
problem grabbing 10 Mb in 5secs - and I'm not even using a top end VLBUS
486 or 32Mb of RAM.
>going on, he loaded MS Word 6.0 and opened a large document. (Oh, BTW,
>whenever he moved a window across the screen, the contents never redrew
>-- the window moved as one solid image, no frame then redraw here.) MS
>Word 6 came up in TWO seconds flat. The console remained RESPONSIVE.
Been doing this for about 3 years under X windows (Hint: Its an option
in the window manager configuration). Has anyone seen it dragging a drawing
window around a Trident TVGA 8900 card 8-)
>Now, the piece de resistance... Chicago was demonstrated. Single 486/66
>CPU, 16 megs RAM. First, a tour of the desktop. All folders. Everywhere,
16Mb of RAM , 486/66 - isn't that an 8 user Linux system for top end
program development.
>long listings of attributes (which now include: creation date,
>modification date and last-read dates!). Filenames can be 256 characters
>long. DOS programs no longer require the PIF Editor. You right-click a
Oh 256 character file names are a feature. Chuckle, say no more say no more.
>PLUG 'N PLAY: At one point, this feature was demonstrated. He turned off
>the machine, inserted a SCSI card in a slot, connected the SCSI cable to
>an external hard drive and powered her up. We saw the usual BIOS POST
>stuff, followed by SCSI ID stuff followed by "Loading Windows..." The
>monitor blanked for a couple of seconds and a psuedo-animated 3D
>"Chicago" logo appeared (along with a November 1993 copyright date). 5
>seconds later, the desktop appeared with the NEW drive on it. Just to
Now this one I find hysterical. If I drop out of even DOS shove in an adaptec,
hook another DOS drive in and power it up then up comes the DOS partition.
If you have the fstab entries then Linux will happily do the same and skip
over absent drives with a warning providing its in your kernel.
>They ran a "BadApp" designed to hose the system with a GPF. It affected
>none of the running processes. None of the systems crashed or glitched
>during the entire evening.
It says a lot for Microsoft that people now think a computer staying up
all evening is a revolutionary idea.
>Chicago has Assembler code in critical areas to enhance performance. NT
>does not (in order to be cross-platform portable).
So does Linux, So does NetBSD.
>Chicago will SMOOTHLY multitask while you write to or format floppies.
So does Linux, So does NetBSD
>Chicago will not limit your "system resource".
So does Linux, SO does NetBSD
>Chicago will replace Windows and DOS, although you can still do a
Not in this case it won't. Linux 1 DOS 0.
>Chicago will run as fast or faster than Windows 3.1 on a 4 MB machine.
Now that isn't hard is it.
>Chicago is compatable with all the current apps you own, all the device
>drivers you now use and all your hardware.
Crap:
>Chicago will cost UNDER $100.
Linux is free, NetBSD is Free.
>
Chicago will ship "second half of 1994".
Linux is shipping, Chicago is shipping.
>
>To benefit from the multithreading capability (ie., to do the amazing
>stuff that they did in Picture Publisher) you need to run versions of
>your apps that are specifically written for Chicago. These will probably
>be available as upgrades as soon as Chicago ships.
Multiple Linux dos emulations already multitask properly. In fact you can't
write non properly-multitasking programs under Linux.
>Chicago can run DOOM in a DOS window.
Linux is soon to be running DOOM native under X windows.
What they don't tell you [From the version I saw, and making a microsoft sales
bod look very unhappy 8-)]
16 bit apps don't really multitask properly.
Its merely 'harder' rather than impossible to crash.
No real security.
Windows are still rectangular and confined to one host. You can't send windows
over the network nor have round or teddy bear shaped windows - or even windows
with holes in. Playing Xinvaders over the network rather took the steam out
of our poor salesman.
You can't change window manager to any old program.
It's certainly what windows should have been in the first place, but its not
going to earn a place on my computer.
Alan
Linux - the integration platform
POSIX - Unix - IBCS2 + extensions - DOS emulation - XZX(spectrum) - XTRS80 -
Lan manager server - NFS server - X windows - TCP/IP - CP/M emulation -
Compilers - Cross compilers - Assemblers - Cross Assemblers - ADA - Pascal -
Fortran convertors - Smalltalk - Modula 2 - Basic - Tcl/Tk - Perl - .....
Who needs more ?
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!cyanamid!
pth027.pt.Cyanamid.COM!crossm
From: cro...@pt.Cyanamid.COM (Martin E. Cross)
Subject: Re: I SAW CHICAGO!
Message-ID: <Co5ztw.Att@cyanamid.uucp>
Lines: 12
Sender: cro...@pth027.pt.Cyanamid.COM (Martin E. Cross)
Reply-To: cro...@pt.Cyanamid.COM
Organization: OrgFreeware
References: <940411170928@lambada> <JON.94Apr11175947@cerberus.cis.yale.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 21:03:31 GMT
Take heart folks, it won't be long before the masses see the light.
The other day I went to my local bookstore (we're I didn't see CHICAGO)
to pick up an O'Reilly when I saw a few shelves packed with books like
"Internet for Dummies" and "Idiots on the Internet." All these books
included disks with free trial offers to get Internet access. The books
covered topics like WAIS and Mosaic (would you rather use CompuServe or
Mosaic?). IMHO, when the rest of the world makes it out here and finds
software like Linux and experience the people who are more than willing
to help, Microsoft will experience a major drop off in revenue. No
dynasty lasts forever.
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: gmd.de!urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de!newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de!
ina.zfn.uni-bremen.de!marvin.pc-labor.uni-bremen.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!
news.belwue.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!udel!news2.sprintlink.net!
news.sprintlink.net!wyvern!taylor.wyvern.com!mark
From: m...@taylor.wyvern.com (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: I SAW CHICAGO!
Organization: Lake Taylor Hospital Computer Services
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 02:15:21 GMT
Message-ID: <1994Apr13.021521.9309@taylor.wyvern.com>
References: <940411170928@lambada> <JON.94Apr11175947@cerberus.cis.yale.edu>
<Co5ztw.Att@cyanamid.uucp>
Lines: 31
cro...@pt.Cyanamid.COM (Martin E. Cross) writes:
> Take heart folks, it won't be long before the masses see the light.
>The other day I went to my local bookstore (we're I didn't see CHICAGO)
>to pick up an O'Reilly when I saw a few shelves packed with books like
>"Internet for Dummies" and "Idiots on the Internet." All these books
>included disks with free trial offers to get Internet access. The books
>covered topics like WAIS and Mosaic (would you rather use CompuServe or
>Mosaic?). IMHO, when the rest of the world makes it out here and finds
>software like Linux and experience the people who are more than willing
>to help, Microsoft will experience a major drop off in revenue. No
>dynasty lasts forever.
The only way Linux/ Linux distributions would ever put even the slightest dent
in the Microsoft Windows world is if it were able to
1) Run all the MS-"Windows" binaries at full speed while still retaining
the power of Unix (IE efficient management of resources, multiuser,
open, security, etc)
2) Install even easier than Slackware (although the new one IS nice),
perhaps with GUI most all the way, lots of auto configuration too
3) Provide a desktop and GUI management to better hide Unix configuration
and upkeep from the lesser capable users
4) Have a better MS-"DOS" emulator (on par with the success rate of Merge).
Who knows what the future will hold....
--
/--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Mark A. Davis | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk, VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
| Sys.Administrator| Computer Services | m...@taylor.wyvern.com .uucp |
\--------------------------------------------------------------------------/
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!
news.amherst.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!news.byu.edu!news.kei.com!
MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!
uknet!cf-cm!cybaswan!iiitac
From: iii...@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: I SAW CHICAGO!
Message-ID: <1994Apr13.125245.1296@uk.ac.swan.pyr>
Organization: Swansea University College
References: <JON.94Apr11175947@cerberus.cis.yale.edu> <Co5ztw.Att@cyanamid.uucp>
<1994Apr13.021521.9309@taylor.wyvern.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 12:52:45 GMT
Lines: 31
In article <1994Apr13.021521.9...@taylor.wyvern.com> m...@taylor.wyvern.com
(Mark A. Davis) writes:
>The only way Linux/ Linux distributions would ever put even the slightest dent
>in the Microsoft Windows world is if it were able to
>
>1) Run all the MS-"Windows" binaries at full speed while still retaining
> the power of Unix (IE efficient management of resources, multiuser,
> open, security, etc)
WABI isn't stunningly reliable but it feels more responsive that Win 3.1.
I'm actually not sure windows compatibility is critical anyway. When I
was a lad a friend once told me the CBM-64 would never catch on because
it wasn't CP/M compatible. Everyone had a Z80 based machine because CP/M
for other things wasn't a standard, and everyone had CP/M. I haven't
seen much CP/M recently..
>2) Install even easier than Slackware (although the new one IS nice),
> perhaps with GUI most all the way, lots of auto configuration too
Slackware is easier to install than Windows (IMHO). I spent 2 days last
time swearing at Windows to get the networking up. Then when it did I
had to redo the whole job again because our TCP/IP was NDIS and Novell was
ODI. I admit to knowing a fair bit about Unix/Networking however.
>3) Provide a desktop and GUI management to better hide Unix configuration
> and upkeep from the lesser capable users
This is the critically lacking area. Whats really lacking I feel though
is tools with the power of Visual Basic so that people can churn out the
kind of Windows widgetry that people rely on.
>4) Have a better MS-"DOS" emulator (on par with the success rate of Merge).
I'm impressed with 0.50.1. It won't run Borland 3.1 but everything else I
wanted to do - including a Novell client - worked.
Alan