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: nommedeguerre who wrote (18785)	4/28/1998 10:41:00 AM
From: Reginald Middleton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

<What is it again that Windows does that Linux cannot? This presents a conundrum which only the Bearded-One or Justin can get us out of.> Windows can run over 10,000 over the counter, shrink wrapped applications natively, Linux cannot not.

To: nommedeguerre who wrote (18785)	4/28/1998 12:00:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

Norm, not that I'd want to intrude in the old time Sal and Reg revival here, but there is a point I'll comment on. Linux and Windows emulation, or Windows emulation in general, is problematic. There's the long running wine saga, but I got my doubts if it'll ever catch up with the morphomatic Roach Motel California Windows API. Sun has wabi, mostly on the back burner now I think. There's Mac Windows emulation, apparently with all of Win95 bundled into it, but I don't know much about that. Good proof in principle, but it requires a Win95 license too I think. I'd guess, without really being able to know, that the best Windows emulation over Unix is built into IE for Solaris, and whatever else comes down the pike there. 43 meg memory image, there's got to be something in there besides a web browser, and Windows emulation would be a lot cleaner way to do the port than hacking the bloated code base, plus it would be a lot more maintainable. I'll go back to another old point I've raised a few times. If what was underneath the "dll hell" Win32 application program runtime was documented and stable, I don't think it'd be hard at all to get Windows apps to run under Linux or any other Unix flavor. I'd guess NT and Win9x have some kind of common underlying OS function set, that the common dll hell code calls. I bet it's a thousand times cleaner than Win32, too. That's not in the Microsoft business plan, though. You got a good monopoly, you want to leverage and extend the proprietary lock, not let other people innovate and compete. Microsoft gives us all the "innovation" and "competition" we could possible want! Just ask Charles "Rick" Rule, or Bill himself. Windows could be replaced in a day, if only there were some bright innovators around. Cheers, Dan.