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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: keithsha who wrote (12045)	11/4/1998 2:26:00 PM
From: Kirce Stojanovski	Respond to of 74651

ADTK at 7 will double in 6 months. Why? Stock recently signed Ford Motor Company, is on the verge to sign General Motors and Chrysler. Have a buyback up to 500000 shares. CEO feels the stock is to low and that next years estimates are to low. No DEBT. Cash of over 20 million. Trading at a low PE. What else can you ask of a stock. The key is they have no DEBT. Check it out ADTK. Do your own research

To: keithsha who wrote (12045)	11/4/1998 3:06:00 PM
From: ToySoldier	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

It never seems to end with you Keithsha :) The amount of humility you can take is amazing.... I am not going to repeat myself on NW5 being revamped - you simply have your FUD book wrapped to tightly around your face. Just think about this logic - in order for NOVL to separate itself from its reliance from IPX and become a pure internet ready OS, it had to rewrite and redesign almost all its modules that plug into its Microkernel. I know this technical understanding of coding escapes you but the rest of the readers know the truth. In fact, you might believe Rudedog about this so ask him if you dont believe me. "NT" and "microkernel architecture"? Those two terms just dont go together. I love MSFT's definition of microkernel. So how many lines of the 45,000,000+ lines of code does MSFT consider to be microkernel? If NT has a microkernel then NetWare already has attained a Nanokernel. Someone better tell the NOVL developers that they dont have to work on NW6 regarding the development of a nanokernel since according to MSFT's definition, NOVL has already attained it!!! LOL - you are sooo funny Keithsha - LOL!!!!! Ahhh You kill me! Where in MSFT do you work - the shipping/receiving area? At least in there you can read the front covers of some of the trade rags and MSFT whitepapers that you must sort for the rest of the employees. So who is going to experience pain? MSFT will be experiencing pain! When they finally have to rip out NT's reliance on NetBios and Domains - trust me - IT WILL HURT! It was painful for NOVL but they have gone through it. MSFT NT is not TCP/IP Pure - it makes for great FUD and BullS**t but anyone who knows how NT operates knows that they must rely on NetBios! Until they can completely remove NetBios from NT, NT is not TCP/IP pure. It will not be able to be completely integrated into the internet. Its so nice that you spewed all the RFCs that are common client type services, but tell me which registered TCP/UDP ports will be used by NT to maintain the Domains, and to have a client find a server, and to have an NT server advertise its services. NW5 has formally registered all NCP type packets with AITA and owns port 524. It uses the open standard SLP RFC to allow NW servers to advertise their services. NW5 is so pure that a NW5 server that is not firewalled from the Internet properly (blocking TCP and UDP ports 524) will be advertising its NDS tree to the Internet for any client on the internet to authenticate into the tree. This is what will allow NW, NDS, and Novell products to be used by ISPs to provide mature DS authenticated services to its customers (such as software renting/leasing which has already been implemented by MT&T in Canada. Not gonna happen with NT! NT4 and NT5 will be a slave to NetBios for a long time to come! They are not TCP/IP pure! Old legacy OS and architecture buddy! Take out a sniffer and see how many IP packets are simply encapsulating NetBios. I'm sure you dont even know how to read a sniffer. So I would ask any other to take up the challenge. Changing the underpinning database system for NDS will be a breeze compared to replacing Active Directory's complete reliance on Domains. But I have noticed that you are completely avoiding anything related to this subject. Believe me, when MSFT is finally forced to go through this process, it will not be pretty for the MSFT customers! Toy

To: keithsha who wrote (12045)	11/6/1998 2:53:00 AM
From: Andy Thomas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Will Windows 2000 consumer be faster on the computers of the year 2000 than Win 98 is on the computers of today, or Win95 was on the computers of 1995, or Win 3.1 during 1992? If you put Windows 3.1x on a Pentium 2 450mhz it would scream and blow away win 9x from a speed standpoint. You can run an assembler program in DOS which blows the doors off of anything I've ever seen in Windows, save for an SMP machine running an NT demo at the Anaheim PDC, 1993. I agree with Shulman that MSFT never bothered to realize the potential of an extended DOS with a text interface. Instead, they put everything into Windows, and the OS has simply gotten slower and slower while the machines have gotten faster and faster. Admittedly, they make speed gains in some areas as they struggle forward with each new major iteration, but at the same time they lose performance in other areas while continuously adding to the overall overhead through never-ending feature bloat. Why doesn't MSFT release something without so much overhead, something which, from an interface standpoint would be quick and thinly-featured? It would have only the features the user wanted, instead of a bunch of excess which slows the machine to a crawl. Also, the desktop metaphor was always flawed. What is MSFT going to do about that in the Windows platform? Why does MSFT support the obviously inferior USB over Firewire... NIH? Why does my machine go haywire when I install win98, convert to FAT32, then uninstall win98? Andy