home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!gossip.pyramid.com!pyramid!infmx!aland
- From: aland@informix.com (Colonel Panic)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
- Subject: Re: The Death of x86 Arch. ?
- Message-ID: <1993Jan12.070917.9049@informix.com>
- Date: 12 Jan 93 07:09:17 GMT
- References: <1992Dec30.032305.21871@netcom.com> <1992Dec30.064135.8443@informix.com> <PCG.93Jan5192712@decb.aber.ac.uk>
- Sender: news@informix.com (Usenet News)
- Organization: Helen Keller Bondurant's Performance Driving School for the Blind
- Lines: 30
-
- In article <PCG.93Jan5192712@decb.aber.ac.uk> pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
- >aland> Also, any of *those* applications should run just fine in
- >aland> DOS-under-UNIX implementations *today*. So, what exactly is the
- >aland> NT advantage?
- >
- >Source, rather then binary, compatibility with Windows 3.1; sw houses
-
- The lack of binary compatibility is supposed to be an ADVANTAGE?
-
- >can "just recompile" an application, if it was written to the WIN32 API,
- >and "almost as easily" if it was written to the WIN16 API.
-
- "Just recompile" -- yeah, right. "If it was written to the XXX API" -- THERE's
- the key part. You're STILL talking about the average user having to
- replace all of their DOS software. Therefore, Alpha NT "compatibility" is
- still more myth than reality.
-
- >Piercarlo Grandi, Dept of CS, PC/UW@Aberystwyth <pcg@aber.ac.uk>
- > E l'italiano cantava, cantava. E le sue disperate invocazioni giunsero
- > alle orecchie del suo divino protettore, il dio della barzelletta
-
- Translation: In Italy, you can't have it; you can't have it. You desperate,
- wretched vacationers all are going to need divine intervention for all
- the trouble you caused in your day of drunken bar-hopping. (Right? [-: )
-
-
- --
- Alan Denney aland@informix.com {pyramid|uunet}!infmx!aland
-
- I'm Pro-Anarchy... and I Vote!
-