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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Roger's 1998 Short Picks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Allan F who wrote (1430)	1/24/1998 5:22:00 PM
From: Roger A. Babb	Respond to of 18691

Allan, for what it is worth I am also in the software development field, CEO & CTO of OSA, Inc. We are an "old" company, developing in FORTRAN and C++ in both the UNIX and NT worlds. (Now you know why I was not faked out by CTXS) I have felt for several years that Windows software is bloated, but it continues to bloat at an exponential rate requiring ever more cpu speed, memory, and storage space. Most people think that MSFT has achieved a permanent monopoly, but I continue to believe that it can be challenged. Many say that for a new OS to be successful, it must be able to run Windows Apps. I disagree, many of the Windows apps are as bad as Windows itself (Office 97 being a prime example). But there are some compatibility issues, a minimum set of which are below: 1. The new OS must be able to communicate and share files on most common Windows networks. 2. The new OS must be able to dual boot on machines that came equipped with Windows and it must be able to share files with the Windows OS in formats such as .TXT .DOC .XLS formats. 3. Not necessary for the new OS to run Windows Apps, but the equivalent apps must be able to exchange data files with the Windows apps. For example, the word processor must be able to read and write .DOC files that MS Word can also read and modify. Same goes for spreadsheet and database files. The ability to seamlessly exchange files is critical. 4. The new OS should maintain the simplicity of Linux and the good features, such as multiple remote users, that Windows is currently missing. If you or anyone else can convince me that they have a realistic chance of success with a new commercial OS, I have access to a few million of venture capital and have the existing corporate infrastructure to execute it. Anyone up to the challenge?