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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alan Buckley who wrote (17516)	2/16/1998 11:17:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

We've heard repeatedly that MSFT boxes you into their proprietary ActiveX, DCOM, etc as soon as you buy their systems. No, Alan, the claim is that if you use ActiveX, DCOM, etc. you are locked into MSFT. That's not quite the same thing, is it? You can still set up your computer any way you want, as long as you're not an OEM. Do you want to dig up an article where somebody claimed Microsoft forced you to use ActiveX? I'm sure they'd like to. Microsoft certainly promotes ActiveX & DCOM, and used to claim they were "open". I'm glad these guys had good experience with NT reliability; many others haven't. It certainly does beat the integrity and uniformity of the Windows95 experience, though. Cheers, Dan.

To: Alan Buckley who wrote (17516)	2/17/1998 6:36:00 PM
From: Keith Hankin	Respond to of 24154

It appears that the article draws a possibly improper conclusion: "We haven't had a [CHX] trading system failure in 12 months vs. a previous track record of three or four per year," Randich says of NT's reliability. Tell that to the platform judge, Unix." Based upon this article, it appears that the old system was not Unix, although you cannot really tell exactly what it was. It says that they were building a Unix-based system a few years back but cancelled it. It looks as if the system with the problems was a VAX system, fronted by PCs. Where was the problem? Was the VAX system using UNIX, OpenVMS, or what?

To: Alan Buckley who wrote (17516)	2/18/1998 8:04:00 AM
From: Justin Banks	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Alan - Below are some choice excerpts. Note the recognition that "each Unix brand is relatively proprietary". The claims of MSFT's competitors that they are "open" and MSFT is "closed" are such a crock. I believe NT will continue to add momentum as it becomes painfully clear which platform is more easily adapted and extended. Where are you getting your definition of proprietary? These Unices are standardized on various POSIX, Unix9x, and other standards, with an specification open to anybody that can read. I fail to see the same degree of openness in MSFT's OS products. MSFT has even gone so far as to get NT POSIX certified, and then proceeded to cripple any program that attempts to use the POSIX subsystems, in what some see as an attempt to hobble the standard itself. I'm curious as to what your background is, and what makes you think that NT is more easily adapted and extended? -justinb