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: Keith Hankin who wrote (19473)	5/19/1998 8:07:00 PM
From: Kevin Hay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

while we're at it, to apply the same law we'll have to strip a lot of things out of windows. multimedia, compression, network support, ..how far back shall we go? Most of those things are part of any OS because they perform basic services (e.g. networking). The key differentiator of what is core OS versus apps or utilities is whether it is a shared resource. If so, basic access needs to be controlled by the OS. ====-=-=-=-=-===-=-=-=-=-= I'm sure Stack Electronics and Novell would disagree on what a basic service is. And who defines that? Who's to say viewing html over the internet is less a basic service than other network functionality? you say it's defined by whether it's a shared resource. But that's just a design decision. And when you realize that this is exactly what msft is trying to do you'll start seeing what the scope of this is: Having all your apps being able to talk with other apps anywhere. All speaking in html, or data, or audio...whatever. This stuff needs to be at a system level, not an add on app. You naysayers are asking to be committed to jave/html - thin client/server apps. While there'll be a definite huge market for this.. ...already is, everthing working with everything will be way more rich and full featured. Both will do just fine. But if you're worried about fascism, worry about the government designing an os. -Kevin

To: Keith Hankin who wrote (19473)	5/19/1998 8:11:00 PM
From: Kevin Hay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

IF (big dreamy if) msft is forced to split up the os into components the end result will be more expensive, not less. I don't think so. After all, you can get most of what MSFT offers in the way of OS functionality out of Linux, and it's free. Besides, lots of the junk that is bundled is not used by most users, anyway. It's the old 80/20 rule. 80% is not used, 20% is. For example, I got Microsoft Office 97 on my machine, but I never use it. Yet I had to pay for it. =-=-===-=-=-=-= First off, why did you get it if you don't use it? bad sentence, right? Secondly, you obviously don't remember what the individual apps used to cost. Excel, alone, listed for ~$500, for years.