CICA 1993 August/CICA.cdr/cis_libs/mswin32/17/confer.txt

Text File | 1992-08-25 | 10.8 KB | 218 lines

Transcript of 2/4/92 Microsoft ISV Relations Conference with Paul Maritz,
Microsoft Senior VP Systems Division
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Jerry Fisher) Welcome! Tonight we are happy to have Paul Maritz, the new
Senior Vice President of our Systems Division.  I will be brief so we can get to
the questions.  Just a couple of reminders.  When you are recognized for a
question be sure to use three dots ... to signify you are continuing a line and ga
(go ahead) when you have completed.  Right now, I would like to turn it over
to Paul for a brief intro.  Paul, ga

(Paul Maritz) HI, I am glad to be able to be with you this evening.  Altho we
have re-org'd somewhat, our strategy and product direction is unchanged.
Any questions...ga

(Jerry Fisher) Ok let's get started

(Mike @ Z-Net) Mr. Maritz, first of all, congratulations on your new position.
Today Steve Ballmer said that NT would be priced in the $400 range.  This
seems to further show to me that Microsoft has a gaping hole somewhere
between their high-end NT and lower-end DOS/Windows solutions. What, if
anything, does MS have planned to fill this hole to provide more oppurtunities
to developers. Thanks & GA.

(Paul Maritz) Firstly thx for the congratulations (not sure if some condolences
aren't also in order, but thx). On the pricing question you have to take into
account the fact that NT does not require DOS. The list prices of MS-DOS and
MS-Windows are $149 and $89 respectively so theorectically you are
comparing $300 vs. $400-$600 (which is the range that Steve Ballmer quoted.)
Now you can ask me about the price of OS/2 2.0... ga

(Mike @ Z-Net) GA

(Mike Sax) First of all, congratulations on your new job as Microsoft's official
(potential) disk-eater.  The new version of Microsoft's original mission is
"Windows on every desk and in every home." What plans does MS have in
consumer computing?  ga

(Paul Maritz) This is a very interesting area. The potential number of units is
enormous, so we are taking it very seriously.in the near term, we are ensuring
that MS-DOS and.MS-Windows can run from ROM, handle new media types,
etc. However, we are also looking at whether we need to develop more
fundamental technologies to address this segment - we have small group of
folks taking a look at this so stay tuned.  ga

(Mike Sax) thanks ga

(Richard Warren) Do you have any response to the 'distinguished' Senator
from Ohio's renewed call for intensive investigation of Microsoft and Intel?
Do you have any response to the 'distinguished' Senator from Ohio's renewed
call for intensive investigation of Microsoft and Intel?  ga

(Paul Maritz) I wasn't aware of the call from the distinguished senator. We are
confident that once the FTC really takes the time to anlalyze our business,
that they will not find anything.seriously out of order. We try to ensure that
our platforms are and will remain open so that ISVs can.be successful.
ga

(Arthur Knowles) Hello, And thank you for the oportunity to speak. I am
curious about the connectivity options for NT and Windows.  I'm particulary
interested in mainframe connectivity.  Are there specific plans? ga

(Paul Maritz) Yes, there are very specific plans.  NT has been very carefully
architected to make it easy to support multiple, simultaneous communications
subsystems. We are doing several ourselves, and other companies are doing
more. If by mainframe connectivity you mean SNA/3270 support, then we
will be doing an NT version of the Comm Server product that we have
developed with.DCL of London and DCA. That product provides backend
LU62 and 3270 support. Many other vendors (futuresoft, walldata, etc. are
doing Win32 versions of their emulators. ga

(Muzaffer KAL) hi, how do you compare the pricing and the hardware
requirements of os/2 2.0 and NT. thanks and ga.

(Paul Maritz) Inspiet of Steve Ballmers comments we actually havent set the
price for NT yet. However there are two points of comparison, OS/2 2.0 at
$149 and Solaris (from Sun) at approx. $1500.  I expect NT to be closer to
the OS/2 2.0 price.  On hardware requirements, it is hard to be definitive as
OS/2 2.0 is being advertized as requiring 4MB but from we can see it really
requires more if you want to do anything interesting, like be on a network as
well as run applications. Windows NT is spec'd for a standard client
configuration at 8MB - this is the configuration that I am currently running
on the 386/33 that I have on my desk.  ga

(Muzaffer KAL) ga

(Mike Sax) When will Windows have a common macro language and what will
the "batch language" of NT be like? ga

(Paul Maritz) Firstly Windows (on MS-DOS) and Windows NT will be
compatible from the UI and API perspectives, so it is correct to simply ask
"what will the WINDOWS" common macro language be.  What we are
proposing is to use a variant of our BASIC language technology, extended to
handle object oriented features, specifically to be well-integrated into OLE.
The details on this will be in the upcoming OLE 2.0 spec.  ga

(Mike Sax) When ? ga

(Paul Maritz) Around mid year.  ga

(Dave Panos) Hi Paul. We have been working very closely with your ISV team
recently and we're interested in knowing where they fit in your new
organization. GA

(Paul Maritz) They are all crowded around me - so that's where...
they are physically... they're fired!... No, actually, they report to Cameronm
Myhrvold who reports to Jon Lazarus, who reports to me. No change there.
ga

(Brett) Hi paul,  I would like to ask two short ?...  First, what is MS going to
do to address the C/C++ Borland products that have an intergated
environment for MSWIN.  I would love to use a MS product but am being
forced to switch to Borland.  Second, does MS still get a cut of the pie for
OS/2 2.0?? go

(Paul Maritz) We are hard at work on C7.0 which will be full C++ compiler,
and have great environment. It will ship very shortly, feedback from beta
users has been very good. In fact, Infoworld had good article on it this week.
As far as OS/2 2.0 goes, it depends on what you mean by a "slice of the pie".
We still have valid licnenses with IBM, details of which I can't divulge.  ga

(Jerry Fisher) Brett, any follow up?

(Brett) Sorry, as for C7.0 will it be an environment that runs in WIN or
Character based in DOS? ga thanks

(Paul Maritz) It runs under Windows.  ga

(Wim van de Bospoort) Hi Pail, Any comments about the current status of
the Apple/ MS lawsuit?, ga

(Paul Maritz) No, I leave that for the lawyers. Do you think Apple has a
copyright on overlapping windows?  ga

(Wim van de Bospoort) I don't think so, but what about the judge? ga

(Paul Maritz) Who knows? We will have to wait to find out. ga

(Brian Bender) Hi Paul.  Thanks for talking with us! What is your
understanding of how OS/2 2.0 will support Windows apps.?  Specifically,
1)  Will the Windows Interface Library for OS/2 (WILOW) go away? and...
2)  Will OS/2 2.0 support DDE  (ddeml.dll)? ga

(Paul Maritz) We still don't know exactly how OS/2 2.0 will support Windows
apps, as nobody has yet got copy of OS/2 2.0 that supports "seamless"
operation of Windows apps, which is what IBM is promising for March. There
are lots of hard problems (compatibility, performance, etc.) that have to be
solved.  Currently build 177H (which is what IBM has given out) runs
Windows apps from a VDM (virtual DOS machine) and the user has to
explicitly start it.  As for the WLO library, we are supporting it for those ISVs
that want it, but are not enhancing it.  OS/2 2.0 does support DDE (it was
supported in OS/2 1.x).  ga

(Brian Bender) OK.  Thanks Paul.  Congrats and good luck! ga

(Mike @ Z-Net) Hi again. ;-) I should've followed up on my last question -but
I wanted to think about how to re-phrase this.  The "gaping hole" between
high-end NT and low-end Dos/Windows is not merely price, that was just the
latest example.  NT has high hardware requirements, and we are told that it is
not currently aimed at the mainstream desktop, but instead toward
workstations, high-end users, servers, etc.  Does Microsoft recognize that
there are users who do not want Windows bound by DOS but also don't need
something quite so big as NT.  Will we see an "NT-lite" or anything along
those lines to address this segment of the market that is not addressed in
Microsoft's current public plans.  GA.

(Paul Maritz) Firstly, Windows is not really "bound" by MS-DOS - when on a
386, Windows is essentially in control, and with Windows 3.1 we will be able
to run 32bit device drivers, etc. However, yes, we do realize that we need to
continue to invest in the lower end of the spectrum. The "personal systems"
group under Brad Silverberg is dedicated to serving this market. The group is
about 200 people and they will not stop work after Windows 3.1.  ga

(Mike @ Z-Net) Thanks, one quick follow-up. When will we see an
HPFS/Mac-like file system under Dos/Windows and will the same file system
be shared between NT & Dos/,Windows.

(Paul Maritz) This is the 64,000 dollar question - there are opposing schools
of thought. There are lot of advantages to doing this, and there is no technical
reason why we can't add it, but in many ways the FAT file system defines
compatibility so it is not something to do lightly.  ga

(Jeff & Wendy) hi paul, could you please clarify a question that brett asked a
few minutes ago... does c 7.0 include a fully optimizing gui compiler or is this
a combination of quick c & a command line compiler is used for optimizing?
ga

(Paul Maritz) It is a fully optmizing compiler that can generate gui apps.
It is not Quick C and C6 packaged together. Does thaat answer your question?
ga

(Jeff & Wendy) sorry, i was not too clear... is the compiler a windows app and
does it produce fully optimized code? ga

(Paul Maritz) The environment runs as a char mode app in a Windows
windows. It does produce fully optimized code - you dont have to escape out
to a command line to get optimized code. It is integrated.  ga

(Jeff & Wendy) thanks,ga

(Jerry Fisher) Thanks for the question.  Unfortunately, we are almost out of
time and will need to let Paul go after this next question.

(Muzaffer KAL) hi again. Do you have a contingency plan in case Apple wins
the case. If yes will it cause any API changes? thanks. GA

(Paul Maritz) No, we are confident of our position.  ga

(Jerry Fisher) Ok.  Thanks to everyone for participating this evening.
Paul do you have any closing comments. ga

(Paul Maritz) Nothing special, other than to say that I look forward to
working with everyone, and am always interested in what people think.
Thanks.  ga

(Jerry Fisher) Thanks again.  A transcript of this will be available in all of
the MS development forums later this week.