|
Why is the middle the obvious choice?
What if you were given the choice of a modular OS vs an OS that was faster, had more functionality, had a smaller footprint and was more reliable? I'm not saying a modular OS is any worse than a black box, but think about some of the problems that may come up. Conversely - there are a ton of advantages to modular OS's as well...
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote:
Why is the middle the obvious choice?
Cause option(3) does not say that the applications that come with the OS are replaceable by other apps.
Nish
Regards,
Nish
Native CPian.
Born and brought up on CP.
With the CP blood in him.
|
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't the creator of the OS have the ability to make the decision of whether applications could be added or not? If consumers don't like that they can't plug their choice in...they have the choice to go buy another OS!
Next time I go buy a car I'm going to ask the Ford dealer why I can't have a GM engine installed.
ed
'Love is an obsessive delusion that is cured by marriage.' Dr. Karl Bowman
|
|
|
|
|
Ed K wrote:
Shouldn't the creator of the OS have the ability to make the decision of whether applications could be added or not?
Not when the OS creator is also a software creator. Microsoft has shown in the past that they will use unpublished API's to create their own software, thus allowing an unfair competitive advantage. This is what started the whole MS antitrust thing in the first place.
Ed K wrote:
If consumers don't like that they can't plug their choice in...they have the choice to go buy another OS!
Next time I go buy a car I'm going to ask the Ford dealer why I can't have a GM engine installed.
Here's a better analogy. Let's suppose your phone company is verizon and they say you can only plug phones made by verizon into your wall jack. If you don't like it, use another phone company. That's great except that there isn't usually another phone company in your area. What difference does it make which phone I put into the jack as long as it meets the standards? None, unless you unfairly want to dominate the phone market.
[By the way, up until about 25 years ago in the US, you HAD to use a phone company provided set.]
-Sean
----
"I'm a breast man."
|
|
|
|
|
AT&T was under strict regulation at that time. Part of the deregulation was to allow other equipment.
In the case of MS we are going in the other direction. More regulation.
As far as those "undocumented API" go, what are they? I always hear people talk about them, but nobody seems to be able to provide a list. Then again, it isn't like undocumented API are anything new.
From the EVIL people who make perl
die() now accepts a reference value, and $@ gets set to that value in exception traps. This makes it possible to propagate exception objects. This is an undocumented experimental feature.
Tim Smith
I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
|
|
|
|
|
To be honest, I don't know what the undocumented API's are. I'm just trying to play devil's advocate here.
I strongly believe however that MS should be producing Windows under the model of [2]. Have the core OS with modular applications. Load up the standard install with the extras. Let me choose a custom install and pick and choose the extras and let me install third-party extras of my own choice.
I do think it's completely fair however to let MS require one of their 'extras' such as Messenger if you want to access a particular MS-provided service. Hey, if you want to use AOL Instant Messaging you must use their client. Microsoft should be allowed to do the same.
The phone company analogy was the best that I could think of at the time.
-Sean
----
"I'm a breast man."
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Cundiff wrote:
Here's a better analogy. Let's suppose your phone company is verizon and they say you can only plug phones made by verizon into your wall jack. If you don't like it, use another phone company. That's great except that there isn't usually another phone company in your area. What difference does it make which phone I put into the jack as long as it meets the standards? None, unless you unfairly want to dominate the phone market
Hey, welcome to the UK, the year is 2002 and still 75% of the country can only use 1 telephone company (BT), cause there aint no others in their area, although they will let you use an "Acme Co" phone if you want to!
Phil.
|
|
|
|
|
I assume that you are referencing a 1 based index array, because otherwise your [3] choice would be out-of-bounds;)
Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day
Light a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I used a 1-based index.
(1) (2) and (3)
Nish
Regards,
Nish
Native CPian.
Born and brought up on CP.
With the CP blood in him.
|
|
|
|
|
I think a company should be able to make whatever kind of software they want and if someone doesn't like it they don't have to buy it. If the non-modular OS were so evil, MS would have never gained so many users and would be losing a lot more than they are to Linux. Don't get me wrong, I do think Linux is a better OS, but MS is obviously making a product that a lot of people like. I don't see how this is any of the government's business.
-Jack
To an optimist the glass is half full.
To a pessimist the glass is half empty.
To a programmer the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
Well stated.
Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day
Light a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life!
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Handy wrote:
If the non-modular OS were so evil, MS would have never gained so many users and would be losing a lot more than they are to Linux.
I disagree. Windows got big with Windows 3.1. There were not a lot of apps integrated, other than simple stuff like Notepad and Solitare, and most of those were optional anyway.
No generalization is 100% true.
Not even this one.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with you, Nish.
99% of the time, adding extra apps to the OS just makes it bigger and slower. Sometimes these extra apps introduce dangerous security holes.
My biggest pet peeve with Windows is the inclusion of a bunch of crap that I never use and can't uninstall. Outlook express is a good example - there may be some home users that use it, but I don't know of one corporation that does. Even if you use Outlook, you generally have a copy of Outlook Express and Outlook both on the same machine. How useful is that?
Windows didn't start out that way. In 3.1, most of the components to install were optional. XP is the other extreme - I am forced to have MSN messenger, Outlook express, media player, etc., on my system.
If I could at least opt not to install these, or to uninstall them later, I'd feel much better.
No generalization is 100% true.
Not even this one.
|
|
|
|
|
The rumour is that with XP service pack 1, you will be able to uninstall many of the non-business related pieces (Messenger, games, movie maker, media player, etc.). This is because many companies have refused to install Win XP (or even Win 2000) until some of that crap can easily be removed.
-Sean
----
"I'm a breast man."
|
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't it be OSes? What am i missing?
take the high road; don't reply "intelligence".
--------
I am not a connoisseur. --Shog9 --
|
|
|
|
|
Are you trying to replace Ravi aka Spell-O-Matic ?
Regardz
Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me 
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Davies wrote:
Are you trying to replace Ravi aka Spell-O-Matic ?
No, this is one of those "You're appostrophe bug's me" things. I honestly want to know if this is wrong, or if it just looks wrong.
--------
I am not a connoisseur. --Shog9 --
|
|
|
|
|
Oh Ok, I cna't give you acorrect answer, as both look right and wrong to me.
Regardz
Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me
|
|
|
|
|
Right - so in this instance the apostrophe is marking the suppression of the 'e'
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
ah. ok. thanks
--------
I am not a connoisseur. --Shog9 --
|
|
|
|
|
So do you pronounce it the same ?
Regardz
Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
More about me
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know if I buy that one. Which two words are you concatenating, OS and es?
Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day
Light a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life!
|
|
|
|
|
er...
Look over there! <runs the other direction quickly>
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apostrophes have two purposes:
1) For use in contractions, to represent a missing letter or letters. For instance, the apostrophe in "I'm" represents the missing "a" ("I am"); the apostrophe in doesn't" represents the missing "o" in "does not."
2) To show possession. To make a noun (or nonpossessive pronoun) that does not end in "s" possessive, add apostrophe and "s" ['s]. If the word does end in "s," simply add an apostrophe after it.
Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day
Light a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
