The real question is why did MicroSoft adopt most of the worse features
cited in the book. X is terrible as are all 2nd systems, but it runs on
top of the OS, not inside it - as did MS Win - until recently, but only
sort-of since DOS comes up in '95, then the GUI, but now you can't turn
off the GUI. They are all for C++ and object oriented code, but can't
seem to reuse their own code. Cryptic commands (which you can at least
chain to do something useful) have been replaced with even more obscure
GUIsms - e.g. Office starts up, but isn't in the startup folder. Some
things are in accessories, others in the control panel, others in
administrative tools, others accessible through some entry buried there or
elsewhere. All the wierd /etc files are now inaccessible registry
entries. NT keeps asking with an error box for a larger swapfile (although
it is only a workstation, no windows are open, and it has 64M of real main
memory and sees it all). NT is more stable, only MS Office seems to be
able to lock it up hard on a regular basis. All this is an improvement
over UNIX/Linux?
I would RECOMMEND the Unix Haters Handbook to everyone on the list, it
will be a good laugh and maybe help Linux be better.
I can only think of two reasons there is no MS OS hater's handbook. 1. It
would take several volumes. 2. It would require a subscription to keep up
to date, as things come an go instead of staying fixed.
On Sun, 13 Apr 1997, Vladimir Mott wrote:
> You people are still trying to promote some UNIX OS?
>
> Get real, this is the '90s.
>
> http://www.danger.net/ - reasons why NT will crush UNIX.
>
>
tz@execpc.com
finger tz@execpc.com for PGP key