home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu.tar
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu
/
icon
/
newsgrp
/
group98a.txt
/
000177_icon-group-sender _Thu Apr 23 19:05:21 1998.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2000-09-20
|
3KB
Return-Path: <icon-group-sender>
Received: from kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU (kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU [192.12.69.239])
by baskerville.CS.Arizona.EDU (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA28735
for <icon-group-addresses@baskerville.CS.Arizona.EDU>; Thu, 23 Apr 1998 19:05:20 -0700 (MST)
Received: by kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU (5.65v4.0/1.1.8.2/08Nov94-0446PM)
id AA05621; Thu, 23 Apr 1998 19:05:18 -0700
From: gep2@computek.net
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 13:09:01 -0500
Message-Id: <199804231809.NAA31088@axp.cmpu.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Win32 API support for Icon
To: icon-group@optima.CS.Arizona.EDU
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17
Errors-To: icon-group-errors@optima.CS.Arizona.EDU
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1912
> I believe Microsoft has made and continues to make Windows programming as
difficult as possible in order to acquire and retain their applications
monopoly.
Oh, I don't think it's really any more than just what it takes to program for a
GUI... Mac programming, I would think, is not a whole lot easier. Sure, it's (a
lot!?) harder to program for a GUI... but the bottom line is that that's the
kind of stuff the market demands, and with more and more high-level features
being needed (wanted?) by applications (device independence, communications,
seamless Internet access, embeddable full-featured spreadsheet and word
processing objects, etc etc.) it's only going to eventually get further and
further that way.
The truth is that I avoid that whereever possible (I think it's perfectly
alright to run a DOS application in a DOS window under Win95 or even NT) but not
every application can be done that way.
I lament, like most of us, the vanishing joy of tight, efficient, assembler
coding where you literally have the machine at the level of the bare silicon.
But few customers are willing to pay anymore what it costs to do things that
way, and one can't really very well argue that they're wrong.
If Microsoft really wanted an "application monopoly" then they wouldn't have
produced things like Visual BASIC (which, judging by the quality of what one
sees on the market, can be programmed by nearly anybody). And tools like Delphi
and the like wouldn't exist.
I don't see at is a "big, evil plot" but more the natural progression of things
in this industry.
The trade rags with their "feature checklists" are in part to blame, too...
encouraging bloat as developers try to make sure that their product won't look
'feature poor' next to the competition.
Gordon Peterson
http://www.computek.net/public/gep2/
Support the Anti-SPAM Amendment! Join at http://www.cauce.org/