|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
We are probably both about 1/2 right, for not only does Microsoft need to
develop a platform which enables thousands of different products to run on
it, the developers of the add/on componants must develop their products to
be compatable with the MS OS. NoneTheLess, the job of MS far outweighs any
add/on developers job, for the reasons stated above. I would submit you are
another non-developer/programmer whom does not have any idea of what goes
into developing hardware/software, but wishes to make an opinion on the
subject without doing any homework, for if you were you would know that the
statement you have made below makes little sense, if you take the time to
think about it.
Kohath
-----Original Message-----
From: Kim Hanson <hantran@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxx <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, November 10, 1999 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: GEN: MS/JUSTICE DEPT RULING?
>an interesting post but you've gotten one thing exactly backwards which
skews
>your argument 180 degress
>Win 98 doesn't have to "be compatable with thousands of different
products,
>hardware and software" THOUSANDS OF DIFFERENT PRODUCTS , HARDWARE AND
SOFTWARE
>HAVE TO BE MADE COMPATIBLE TO WIN 98.
>
>kohath wrote:
>
>> Computers, and computer software, are extremly complex. The reason there
>> are so many incompatabilities between software programs and hardware. If
>> WIn 98 is bad now, wait until there are 300 versions out there to choose
>> from. Will this hardware work with this version, will this program work
>> with this version. It's bad enough as it is, now. Ever hear of the
rumor
>> game, whereby a line is formed of 10 people, a rumor is whispered in the
>> first persons ear, and see what the last person heard and compare it to
the
>> original. Software development, especially an OS as complex as Win 98,
is a
>> lot like that. When you have thousands of computer programers working on
a
>> product such as Win 98, each having their own idea of how something
should
>> be done, competition to get the biggest raise, (so my idea is better than
>> yours, who cares if it makes the product better), a majority of the
>> programmers having no business being programmers, you end up with a
product
>> that is full of bugs. Couple that with the fact that their are millions
>> more programmers/wannabe programmers designing the software/hardware to
>> complement the OS, and you have a recipe for disaster. Actually, I am
>> suprised that Win95, 98, NT work, given the difficulties described above,
as
>> well as they do.
>>
>> The amount of hours spent in developing a product such as Win 98 is not
>> measured in a few programmers working for a few weeks to put out the new
>> operating system. There are probably millions of man hours invested in
the
>> development of Win 98. Comparing a program that displays your quotes on
the
>> computer for you like Windows on Wall Street or Trade Station to WIn 98
is
>> like comparing the size of an Ant to an Elephant. There is no
comparison,
>> for all practical purposes. Win 98 must be compatable with thousands of
>> different products, hardware and software. To expect all bugs to be
removed
>> from a software program that has 25+ million lines of code is rediculus.
It
>> will never happen, no matter how much time a company spends debbuging
it's
>> products. Actually, for the price of $90 for Win 98, that is cheap,
>> compared to other monopolies out there. Take your quote service, you pay
>> more than $90 each MONTH for quotes. And check out the price for TS or
WOW.
>> Neither of these programs is 100th the program Win98 is. Why the
rediculus
>> price. Those guys make BIll Gates look like a boy scout saving for his
>> first bycicle. IMO they should be around $3 (for the quotes), to be fair
to
>> all, but, what's fair in the corporate world. Look at the automobiles,
>> $30,000 for a new car? That's rediculus. How about %60 of your income
>> every year to help fund the biggest monopoly of all time in U.S. History?
>>
>> .
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Brent <brente@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: Real Traders Forum <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Earl Adamy
>> <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Sunday, November 07, 1999 3:05 PM
>> Subject: Re: GEN: MS/JUSTICE DEPT RULING?
>>
>> > This is a very complicated issue. Some have said that a breakup of big
M
>> > would hurt the whole US economy. They said the same about other
companies
>> > though.
>> >
>> > I just have a few thoughts (questions) about this puzzle. Why hasn't
there
>> > been any other OS come along to do battle with big M? Say a company in
the
>> > far east wanted to compete. Couldn't they make a knock off OS and sell
it
>> > for $49.95 (cheaper) just like they did with cars, TV's, video
>> recorders...
>> > etc? Why didn't Apple, IBM, Xerox, etc. wake up in time?
>> >
>> > That's about it.
>> >
>> > Brent
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
|