Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      22 Nov 1999 04:43:32 +0200
From:      Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
To:        freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Judge: "Gates Was Main Culprit"
Message-ID:  <86iu2v9rfv.fsf@localhost.hell.gr>
In-Reply-To: "David Schwartz"'s message of "Sun, 21 Nov 1999 17:24:22 -0800"
References:  <000001bf3488$4e7573a0$021d85d1@youwant.to>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
"David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> writes:

> > At 12:59 PM 11/21/1999 -0800, David Schwartz wrote:
> >
> > >         Windows 98's disk compression is better than Stac's.
> >
> > Stac doesn't do disk compression for Windows 98, so the above
> > is absurd.
> 
> Err, right. That's why Stac is out of the market. If they provided a
> superior product for the operating systems that people wanted to use,
> they'd still be here.

Remember that 'closed' API thing?  Now apply this to memory management
software, and it call becomes crystal clear.  Of course MS-DOG did not
actually have disk compression in the OS, but then again it did not have
memory management and you had to roll your own... it was after all only
a 'disk operating system' (without disk compression or a descent
filesystem, one could note), so why bother about mem-management?

> > >Windows 98's memory management is better than Quaterdeck's.
> >
> > Again, a disingenuous comparison. QEMM did not do the same sort of
> > memory management as Windows 98.
> 
> 	Right. That's exactly my point.

I have to agree than apples were never really similar to oranges.

> > >IE is a better browser than Netscape's
> >
> > Not so, especially from a security standpoint. IE is riddled with
> > DANGEROUS security problems.
> 
> You are the only one who thinks this. Pretty much everybrowser
> shootout since the respective 4.0 products were released has been won
> by IE. If you don't like ActiveX (which I personally don't), you can
> turn it off (which I don't either, *sigh).

You are probably one of the few users unaware of the semi-regular
IE-based windows-exploit-of-the-week and that sure is at least
interesting.  Unless of course, you have some personal reason to
re-baptize exploits to 'features'.  I hope this has nothing to do with
the pretty obvious fact that you are in a way 'employed' in M$.

> 
> > Alas, Netscape was shut down by Microsoft's predatory tactics. The
> > shell of the company was bought by AOL, primarily for its portal
> > and peripherally so that AOL could avoid total dependence on
> > Microsoft's browser by keeping Navigator barely alive.
> 
> Umm, it had nothing to do with any predatory tactics. It had
> everything to do with IE being a better browser.

> And as I explained, using predatory tactics to replace a superior
> product with an inferior one gains nothing.

With the exception of a few extra bucks and a larger market share (at
least for a while).  The only thing that remains unresolved is, of
course, will that short while be enough for the competitor to get kicked 
out of the market or not?  I know, I know, bussiness is sometimes a very 
risky thing.

-- 
Giorgos Keramidas, <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
"What we have to learn to do, we learn by doing." [Aristotle]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86iu2v9rfv.fsf>