Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PJ Strifas who wrote (28841)	11/10/1999 1:28:00 PM
From: Scott C. Lemon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42771

Hello PJ, > It's my understanding there are certain obstacles to getting a "new > OS" to market. ;-) Many ... > These obstacles can be deadly and with out time and money there is > no chance for success. I think that I've learned over the years, that anything can be accomplished with time and/or money ... if you don't have either, then I can't see much of a way to accomplish anything ... > Unfortunately, MSFT has all the time and money it can afford to > "battle" any new comers at this time and the foreseeable future. ;-) > Here's the rub: > > One of the highest hurdles in getting a new OS to market is support > from hardware vendors. I don't believe it's easy or cheap to write > new code for a new OS much less get some hardware company to invest > in doing that for/with you as MSFT has. Things brings to mind a number of issues. I don't actually think that it's hardware support, but more importantly the applications. I believe that the most critical factor in OS adoption is the suite of applications that run on that platform. This then brings in several other factors. 1) Do the applications support the content and legacy data formats that I need? Obviously, if I put all my data into dBase format years ago, I need applications that support that format. Likewise, if I need to exchange data with other people using dBase format, then I need to export/save in dBase format. 2) Does the OS and platform support any of the required peripherals to utilize the applications. Again, beyond the basics of network and disk, if the OS and platform doesn't support the peripherals that I need for my applications, then I'm in trouble. What's facinating about this second issue, is that this is the exact spot that Intel and Microsoft have been fighting over ... the tension in the relationship. Intel wants to create a "standard" for peripheral interaction so that more OS platforms gain compatibility with the peripherals and peripheral subsystems. Microsoft wants to keep the peripheral software support in Windows. > [In the past, it's been said that MSFT had gone out of their way to > make it known to hardware vendors that doing just this was not good > for their own good. Just the thought of this possibly happening > should alarm us all. This type of "behavior" is ONLY good for > MSFT and in a level playing field it's damn good business - only > thing is that MSFT isn't playing on a level playing field and that > changes things.] A lot of things have supposedly been "said" ... is this in the "finding of fact"? Why not stick to facts ... ;-) > What I'm thinking is along the lines of the multitude of drivers > developed for Windows platform for instance. So why not utilize the hardware standards that are developing? For example, I2O is Intel's solution in this area. I very nice solution which provides increased performance, asymetric multi-processing, and elimination of the requirement for vendor specific drivers ... > If this hurdle was to be lowered say by allowing a company to > re-use the software (layer) in the Windows OS that interfaces with > the hardware device driver in some way...if this information > (source code) was made available publicly for a licensing fee I > believe we could see a change in the computer industry - a shift if > you will. So this would be an effort to provide the licensing of the HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) in Windows? I guess that if an organization was interested in doing this, it might be possible. But this assumes that people are impressed with the architecture of the HAL, and how it fits to their OS. Instead, I would have to say that I'm impressed with the Linux approach ... and the fact that drivers for various hardware are showing up everywhere! And the vendors are releasing their software drivers into the public domain, instead of hording them and forcing the support and development to be done by their own limited resources. I can't tell you how many times I called vendors asking for source code of drivers to allow me to modify/enhance the capabilities ... with not a single taker! I always offered non-disclosure, and to return the modified source to them ... ;-( I believe that the real solution is the one that has been architected by Intel with I2O ... and even some of the Jini ideas. If the interfaces and methods of communications become standard enough, then the peripherals can communicate with the host systems at a higher level and negotiate the interaction ... Scott C. Lemon