To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Joel Arg » Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:00:00



Sorry to vent, but I must!

I have been beating on MS Windows 98 trying to get a OpenGL hardware
accelerated 3d DLL file to work with DirectX6 so I can play glQuake and
glHexen II.  They worked before with DirectX5 and I guess I will have to go
back to it.  I feel for any business going down the Microsoft Win 95/98/NT
(now 2000) road.  Sooner or later the  POS (note: I don't consider it an OS
any more and P stands for piece) will frustrate the hell out of 'em.  Yeah,
I know business people won't use OpenGL games for important stuff, but if MS
can't deliver something that should work after how many POS generations of
upgrades, bug fixes, patches or freaking features, I want something else.

This is a plea.  Hurry up and get popular so game companies will happily
support linux or BeOS.  And don't stop working, cause I guarantee there will
come a day when I run anything but a MS POS operating system.

Now that I've got that out, go back to work.

TIA...

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by jan » Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:00:00



> Sorry to vent, but I must!

> I have been beating on MS Windows 98 trying to get a OpenGL hardware
> accelerated 3d DLL file to work with DirectX6 so I can play glQuake and
> glHexen II.  They worked before with DirectX5 and I guess I will have to go

But why don't you just look in the source and fix it? What? You don't haveany
source code?

/jan

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Joel Arg » Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:00:00


You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had the source
code, I doubt that I could fix it.  That's why I made the plea for others to
bang out a first rate OS, so I wouldn't have to bang on it for enjoyment.  I
suspect allot of  MS users share my thoughts.  Linux and/or BeOS procreators
could capture a much larger share of the mass user populace if they remember
that.  The software companies other than MS, if they want to survive for the
long haul, better leave DOS, Win16 and Win32s behind or become the next
Lotus, Word Perfect, Borland, Netscape, yada, yada, yada.  The Activisions,
Eidoses and other game companies will be next after (assuming evil empire
success) DirectX becomes stable enough that MS can make games part of the
OS.



>> Sorry to vent, but I must!

>> I have been beating on MS Windows 98 trying to get a OpenGL hardware
>> accelerated 3d DLL file to work with DirectX6 so I can play glQuake and
>> glHexen II.  They worked before with DirectX5 and I guess I will have to
go

>But why don't you just look in the source and fix it? What? You don't
haveany
>source code?

>/jan

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Pinoche » Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:00:00



>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had the
>source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a tangible
advantage myself.

Quote:>  That's why I made the plea for others to bang out a first rate OS, >so I

wouldn't have to bang on it for enjoyment.

A most logical request..

Quote:>I suspect allot of  MS users share my thoughts.

Certainly.

Quote:>  Linux and/or BeOS procreators could capture a much larger >share of the

mass user populace if they remember that.

Um, it's not banging out a first-rate OS, it's making certain other moves
to ensure that the OS appeal to the public.

Quote:>The software companies other than MS, if they want to survive for >the

long haul, better leave DOS, Win16 and Win32s behind or >become the next
Lotus, Word Perfect, Borland, Netscape, yada, >yada, yada.

Well, I agree they should leave the first two behind, but not for the same
reasons.    I don't see why they should drop Win32 and such though...if
they can't compete effectively with MS, they aren't going to be able to do
so with any other marginally competent company.
MS isn't all powerful, Lotus, WP, the others all lost as much through their
own faults as any actions by Microsoft.    It might look like a good idea
to go to a less rigorous cliff, but in actuality, you're just as open to a
rockslide there as anywhere else.

Quote:>  The Activisions, Eidoses and other game companies will be next >after

(assuming evil empire success) DirectX becomes stable >enough that MS can
make games part of the OS.

Uh-no.   Only if they're(the game companies) are stupid, the lack of which
isn't guaranteed, but then MS would also have to have a reason for
it......and I just can't see any gain for them, I really can't

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by j.. » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00




>>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had the
>>source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

>That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a tangible
>advantage myself.

        ...but someone can...

[deletia]

        No one could get away with selling a fixed up version of
        MS Word or Win98 or even do it for free.

--
Unix had  startmenus and tasbars before Microsoft          |||
even had a decent memory manager for DOS.                 / | \

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Tracy R Re » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00




>>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had the
>>source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

>That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a tangible
>advantage myself.

This is a common comment on open source but it's very shortsighted. Just
because *you* can't make use of the sourcecode doesn't mean *nobody* can. And
by having the source code open you greatly increase the chance of someone
else...waitaminute...I just noticed who I'm replying to. You've had all of this
explained to you over and over again and you still don't get it.

You honestly don't see that by having many thousands of people who know what
they are doing looking over the code as opposed to perhaps a few dozen, you
benefit by having better tested and debugged software? It's pretty clear to me.

--
Tracy Reed      http://www.ultraviolet.org
"Administering a Linux server is no more difficult than properly running
Windows NT."
  -- Infoworld, November 24, 1997

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Hap » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00


i think the beos communities embracement of elf and egcs is a huge step
forward.  now if they can program in nfs and all the other goodies that
make it a blind client (meaning no special software needed to connect to a
linux box -- it connects like a charm out of the box) to linux, i'd welcome
the two joining forces.  beos would make a lovely client for linux servers.
 all the basic stuff is there (gui, drivers, etc).

H



> You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had the
source
> code, I doubt that I could fix it.  That's why I made the plea for others
to
> bang out a first rate OS, so I wouldn't have to bang on it for enjoyment.
 I
> suspect allot of  MS users share my thoughts.  Linux and/or BeOS
procreators
> could capture a much larger share of the mass user populace if they
remember
> that.  The software companies other than MS, if they want to survive for
the
> long haul, better leave DOS, Win16 and Win32s behind or become the next
> Lotus, Word Perfect, Borland, Netscape, yada, yada, yada.  The
Activisions,
> Eidoses and other game companies will be next after (assuming evil empire
> success) DirectX becomes stable enough that MS can make games part of the
> OS.



> >> Sorry to vent, but I must!

> >> I have been beating on MS Windows 98 trying to get a OpenGL hardware
> >> accelerated 3d DLL file to work with DirectX6 so I can play glQuake
and
> >> glHexen II.  They worked before with DirectX5 and I guess I will have
to
> go

> >But why don't you just look in the source and fix it? What? You don't
> haveany
> >source code?

> >/jan

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Core » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00


<snip>

Quote:> Sooner or later the  POS (note: I don't consider it an OS
> any more and P stands for piece) will frustrate the hell out of 'em.  Yeah,

<snip>

        POS?

        I believe S.O.S. is a bit more befitting...

Beers,

Corey

        "Windows is an utter kludge, the ultimate tar baby, sucking you in,
        making things harder and harder, until you are hopelessly snagged
        and stuck, exhausted from fighting with it, resigned to despair.
        It is an inscrutable, god-awful mess, a disaster waiting to happen,
        a bonehead botch-job jammed with you-can't-get-there-from-here
        idiocy.
                -- Paul Somerson, PC Computing

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Core » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00




> >You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had the
> >source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

> That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a tangible
> advantage myself.

        This has *got* to be a troll ... I mean, how could you be so
        ridiculously ignorant?

        It's the source code ( freely available to everyone and anyone
        who wants it ) which has made linux so successfull.

        It's the source code which is why you can get bug/security fixes
        for linux so damned quickly.

        It's the source code which enables people from all over to
        create/fix/enhance/learn from code that they would otherwise
        never get the chance to.

        Your reality tunnel must be extremely self centered indeed for
        you to not see the simple, obvious concept that there are
        *others* who make use of this source code which you yourself
        may not have the skills or interest necessary to utilize.

Quote:> >  That's why I made the plea for others to bang out a first rate OS, >so I
> wouldn't have to bang on it for enjoyment.

> A most logical request..

        I personally would call this a most self-serving request ...

        There are allways those yelling "Go Team!" on the sidelines,
        but never willing to actually play.

        You don't need to be a programmer willing to spend precious
        free time to develop and distribute code or applications in
        order to help further along linux or BeOS.  Simply using
        one/both of them and purchasing/downloading the developing
        applications that run on them goes a long way.

        Otherwise advocating something you have absolutely no part
        in makes you look foolish and hypocritical.

Beers,

Corey

        "Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy."
        -- Charlie McCarthy

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Pinoche » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00



>On Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:07:25 -0600, Pinochet


>>>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had >>>the

source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

Quote:>>That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a >>tangible

advantage myself.

Quote:> ...but someone can...

Someone *might* but then, cows might fly out of my *too.
 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Pinoche » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00





>>>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had the
>>>source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

>>That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a tangible
>>advantage myself.

>This is a common comment on open source but it's very >shortsighted.

No, actually it isn't.

Quote:> Just because *you* can't make use of the sourcecode doesn't >mean

*nobody* can.

Just because somebody *can* doesn't mean somebody will.

Quote:>And by having the source code open you greatly increase the >chance of

someone else...

Still a gamble, is it not?

Quote:>waitaminute...I just noticed who I'm replying to. You've had all of this
>explained to you over and over again and you still don't get it.

No, you don't get what I'm saying.

Quote:>You honestly don't see that by having many thousands of people >who know

what they are doing looking over the code as opposed >to perhaps a few
dozen, you benefit by having better tested and >debugged software? It's
pretty clear to me.

You honestly don't see that it doesn't guarantee anything?    That things
can still get messed up?  That there's no guarantee that thousands of
people *will* look at any particular piece, or that any of those who do
will know anything??

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by Pinoche » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00





>>>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had >>>the

source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

Quote:>> That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a >>tangible

advantage myself.

Quote:> This has *got* to be a troll ... I mean, how could you be so
> ridiculously ignorant?

You mean how could I dare I disagree with some holy mantra?

Quote:> It's the source code ( freely available to everyone and anyone
> who wants it ) which has made linux so successfull.

Which doesn't change what I said one bit.

Quote:> Your reality tunnel must be extremely self centered indeed for
> you to not see the simple, obvious concept that there are
> *others* who make use of this source code which you yourself
> may not have the skills or interest necessary to utilize.

And you must think that I care to rely on these people to do anything of
benefit to me, that it fails to produce much a  tangible advantage for me.
You do know what the word tangible means, don't you?   I didn't say that
there was *no* possible advantage, just that is wasn't of a certain nature.

Quote:>>>That's why I made the plea for others to bang out a first rate >>>OS, so

I  wouldn't have to bang on it for enjoyment.

Quote:>> A most logical request..
> I personally would call this a most self-serving request ...

Some reason self-serving and logical are exclusive?    Personally, I see
them going hand in hand all the time.

Quote:>Otherwise advocating something you have absolutely no part
> in makes you look foolish and hypocritical.

I suggest you try not to be so judgmental.
 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by j.. » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00




>>On Thu, 29 Oct 1998 23:07:25 -0600, Pinochet


>>>>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had >>>the
>source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

>>>That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a >>tangible
>advantage myself.

>> ...but someone can...

>Someone *might* but then, cows might fly out of my *too.

        That's what money is for: motivating people to be
        garbage collectors and Microsoft developers despite
        having different ideas on what they want to do with
        their time.

        Whereas some of us actually find quite enjoyable
        pouring over driver source code and microprocessor
        manuals to finally find the primary, 4 bit
        incompatibility in between a BT848 and BT878 based
        Video Overlay Card.

        Ask ASA computers about the feasablilty of cows
        flying out your ass.

--
Unix had  startmenus and tasbars before Microsoft          |||
even had a decent memory manager for DOS.                 / | \

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://www.veryComputer.com/

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by j.. » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00






>>>>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had >>>the
>source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

>>> That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a >>tangible
>advantage myself.

>> This has *got* to be a troll ... I mean, how could you be so
>> ridiculously ignorant?

>You mean how could I dare I disagree with some holy mantra?

        You wouldn't buy a car that could only be serviced by
        sending it back to it's factory? Why tolerate that of
        a computer.

        The whole motivation behind IP, BTW, is the useful
        (as in for use by parties other than the inventor)
        disclosure of new technologies & not just enrichment
        of the inventor.

Quote:

>> It's the source code ( freely available to everyone and anyone
>> who wants it ) which has made linux so successfull.

>Which doesn't change what I said one bit.

        One would think that independent consultants don't
        exist in your Lotus Notes populate world <smirk>.

Quote:

>> Your reality tunnel must be extremely self centered indeed for
>> you to not see the simple, obvious concept that there are
>> *others* who make use of this source code which you yourself
>> may not have the skills or interest necessary to utilize.

>And you must think that I care to rely on these people to do anything of
>benefit to me, that it fails to produce much a  tangible advantage for me.
>You do know what the word tangible means, don't you?   I didn't say that
>there was *no* possible advantage, just that is wasn't of a certain nature.

        Ever played a console video game lately?
[deletia]

--
Unix had  startmenus and tasbars before Microsoft          |||
even had a decent memory manager for DOS.                 / | \

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com

 
 
 

To the communities, please hurry and put a stake in the heart of MS POS...

Post by j.. » Sat, 31 Oct 1998 04:00:00






>>>>You have a lot of faith in someone you don't know.  Even if I had the
>>>>source code, I doubt that I could fix it.

>>>That's one reason I've never seen source code as much of a tangible
>>>advantage myself.

>>This is a common comment on open source but it's very >shortsighted.

>No, actually it isn't.

>> Just because *you* can't make use of the sourcecode doesn't >mean
>*nobody* can.

>Just because somebody *can* doesn't mean somebody will.

        All you have to do is motivate someone: Create the
        appeance of a market, ask the right person, pay
        someone.

        You wouldn't expect Firestone to work for free, yet
        you think that's the only way things get done with
        GPLed and LGPLed software.

Quote:

>>And by having the source code open you greatly increase the >chance of
>someone else...

>Still a gamble, is it not?

        ...not if you've got the resources to pay for a stiff
        support contract anyways...

Quote:

>>waitaminute...I just noticed who I'm replying to. You've had all of this
>>explained to you over and over again and you still don't get it.

>No, you don't get what I'm saying.

        We get it. WE just don't agree. Closed source puts you at
        the mercy of ONE company. Open Source allows anyone to open
        a 'corner garage', should someone feel the motivation.

        You have a much better chance as a smaller consumer, or even
        a larger one, to motivate a smaller interest than one that
        is so large and pre* that they can ignore nearly anyone.

Quote:

>>You honestly don't see that by having many thousands of people >who know
>what they are doing looking over the code as opposed >to perhaps a few
>dozen, you benefit by having better tested and >debugged software? It's
>pretty clear to me.

>You honestly don't see that it doesn't guarantee anything?    That things
>can still get messed up?  That there's no guarantee that thousands of
>people *will* look at any particular piece, or that any of those who do
>will know anything??

        The common experience with previous technologies open
        to 3rd party support quite definitively contradict your
        assumption.

        It's supposed to be a demand driven creature (the free
        market) after all...

--
Unix had  startmenus and tasbars before Microsoft          |||
even had a decent memory manager for DOS.                 / | \

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://www.veryComputer.com/