Dr. W95, over here!

  • Thread starter Thread starter MatuX
  • Start date Start date
M

MatuX

Guest
--To public: This is a discussion that Dr. W95 and me keep in the modding forum, I decided to move it here because it was getting off-topic, if anyone wants to argue about this, you're welcome!--

>>Office 2000 has a lot more
>>options than its predecessor
>That's what I'm talking about! Taking
>Word as example, even Word6
>had A LOT more options
>than a normal user could
>ever need!
>

That is because Office wasn't made for the "normal user". That is why it costs $678923789 dollars, they want to catch professional users with all the money.
And that is why there is a Office Premium, Office Professional, Office Enterprise, Office Educative, Office BlahBlah (and all of them at different prices).

And that is why I bought the pirate version at $0.

>> plus
>>it's 900 times faster
>I doubt
>

Hehe... Word6 takes like 5 or 7 seconds to load, Word 2000 takes less than 2. The same with Outlook.

>> and
>>it never crashed.
>This improvement should be done with
>a patch, not with a
>newer version of a program.
>Oh c'mon! Stop excusing Microsoft's
>money thirst!
>

Of course I agree with you!! And not only that, I think that, as being one of the most well-known and important computer companies, their programs shouldn't even have bugs at all.

But we're talking about how their programs improved on versions, and there's a fact that those two Microsoft products (office and VB) improved on higher versions, in a way or another, they improved.

I don't defend Microsoft, I don't like Microsoft's products (I only like Visual Studio and Age of Empires :-)), I think that their programs aren't the best.
I admire Microsoft just for one thing. Marketing. Those bitches crushed all its opponents not because their programs were great, but because they found the best way to make their programs reach the computer user.

When the first Office came out, its cost was exactly the same than WordPerfect. WordPerfect was thousands times better than Word, but... They lost the market... Office sold out, and when Quattro or Lotus released their "Office" version, it was very late...
The same with Borland C++ and Visual Studio, the same with Navigator and Explorer, do you remember that you HAD TO pay for Netscape Navigator????

>>VB 6 dll only increased ~300kb
>>from version 3, its code
>>is as fast as C++
>>programs and it's impressively more
>>powerfull.
>VB is more powerful than CPP??
>Man, you should not work
>at night. Look's like you're
>getting crazy.
>

Umm.. no no, hehehe, maybe you're right... I just wanted to say that VB 6 was impressively more powerfull THAN VB 3, not cpp. :))))

VB will *never* of the *nevers* be as powerfull as CPP. Although, it can achieve its flexibility, never its power of control.

>
>>VB 7 incorporates the last 3
>>basic OOP routines to be
>>a 100% OOP language program
>>and incorporates lotsa more functions
>>(just readed some public-tester's articles
>>about it).
>Don't trust everything you read.
>

They're facts, Doc, not promises.

>>Visual Basic isn't RAD anymore. Visual
>>Basic is a true powerfull
>>OOP program language. VB is
>>not a newbies toy.
>Loosing the status of a newbies
>toy, it has lost the
>most important of it's advantages.
>

And I'm glad for it! I can create the *same* programs in VB, 5 thousand times faster than if I were making them in CPP.

But don't misunderstand. VB is excellent for certain kind of projects, and CPP is excellent for another kind of projects.

>>No no, ignorant people discuss about
>>VB runtimes because "they are
>>big", and what the heck
>>do you care how big
>>they're if they're installed with
>>Windows??! (of course, we're talking
>>about a 1mb file, not
>>a 400mb file!)
>If all of them were installed
>with windows, we weren't arguing
>about this now. Just scan
>through my thread message again.
>

First, yes, I commited a mistake. They're installed from Windows 98 (first version) and higher.
Second, they aren't "all". It's just ONE file. MSVBVM60.dll

>Also, the coincidence that VB was
>created by MS, which also
>created the most popular operating
>system, doesn't say anything about
>the advantages or disadvantages of
>VB. Declined.
>

Don't decline because you want, Doc... It's an advantage that VB runtimes are installed with Windows.

>>It's a matter of people's interest,
>>I'm not an ignorant if
>>I want to travel and
>>I don't know how the
>>plane is built.
>Of course not, but you should
>have basic learnings about planes.
>If you do not, that
>DOES mean ignorance. And ignorance
>is dangerous. Just read the
>book.
>

Ignorance is dangerous for the one who needs the knowledge, that is all.


[p align=center]
MatuX
Co-Leader and Chief Programmer on
http://clanfusionn.hypermart.net/tmslogo1.gif
[font size=1]GFX by Smackrazor
[font size=2]http://www.modsquad.f2s.com[/p]
 
>Of course I agree with you!!
>And not only that, I
>think that, as being one
>of the most well-known and
>important computer companies, their programs
>shouldn't even have bugs at
>all.

You'd expect that but the opposite is true: The more bloated a software company, the less it has to concern itself with creating bugless software. Microsoft knows that it is simply putting out their software that makes them their money, not the *quality* of the software. That's why they can get away with releasing their untested beta software to the public and making them pay for patch upgrades (Win98 and Win98se) citing that they are new software.

*EVERYBODY* knows, even Bill Gates, that Windows is a HORRIBLE operating system. The programmers in Microsoft (and this is true) don't even know what actually in the source code of Windows anymore. The *only* reason that they maintain a market share is because of the software developers that create software for Microsoft. As long as Microsoft can maintain its developer base, it will survive.

>The same with Borland C++ and
>Visual Studio, the same with
>Navigator and Explorer, do you
>remember that you HAD TO
>pay for Netscape Navigator????

Well, I have to say that Internet Explorer *is* better than Navigator. Navigator takes a year to load, doesn't have enough features and even the Linux version has some of the bugs the Windows one does.

How ironic that they made people pay for it and now they give away the source code.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Sep-18-00 AT 01:56PM (GMT)[p]>That is because Office wasn't made
>for the "normal user".
Hm, at least it's promoted like something which everyone could not live without (the same with all microsoft products)

>And that is why I bought
>the pirate version at $0.
*Writes something to his notebook*

>Hehe... Word6 takes like 5 or
>7 seconds to load, Word
>2000 takes less than 2.
>The same with Outlook.
*I* *doubt*

>>This improvement should be done with
>>a patch, not with a
>>newer version of a program.
>>Oh c'mon! Stop excusing Microsoft's
>>money thirst!
>>
>
>Of course I agree with you!!
>And not only that, I
>think that, as being one
>of the most well-known and
>important computer companies, their programs
>shouldn't even have bugs at
>all.
Isn't that imposs.. whait, it IS possible.

>But we're talking about how their
>programs improved on versions, and
>there's a fact that those
>two Microsoft products (office and
>VB) improved on higher versions,
>in a way or another,
>they improved.
First of all, the word 'improve' have multple meanings. A program can 'improve' either when it becomes more powerful, or when it becomes more stable, or when it becomes easier and more convenient to use.

>I admire Microsoft just for one
>thing. Marketing. Those bitches crushed
>all its opponents not because
>their programs were great, but
>because they found the best
>way to make their programs
>reach the computer user.
True

>Umm.. no no, hehehe, maybe you're
>right... I just wanted to
>say that VB 6 was
>impressively more powerfull THAN VB
>3, not cpp. :))))
hehehe

>VB will *never* of the *nevers*
>be as powerfull as CPP.
>Although, it can achieve its
>flexibility, never its power of
>control.
yup

>They're facts, Doc, not promises.
How do you know?

>>Loosing the status of a newbies
>>toy, it has lost the
>>most important of it's advantages.
>>
>
>And I'm glad for it! I
>can create the *same* programs
>in VB, 5 thousand times
>faster than if I were
>making them in CPP.
ok ok whatever.

>But don't misunderstand. VB is excellent
>for certain kind of projects,
>and CPP is excellent for
>another kind of projects.
I don't have anything against that

>First, yes, I commited a mistake.
>They're installed from Windows 98
>(first version) and higher.
>Second, they aren't "all". It's just
>ONE file. MSVBVM60.dll
Only one of all the runtimes, supplied with only windows 98... ok, let it be an advantage. A SMALL advantage. :)

>Ignorance is dangerous for the one
>who needs the knowledge, that
>is all.
Dammit MatuX, just read the damn book! That's too long to explain here, especially with my level of english :)

~Dr. W95
the Super-Puper Admin
http://www.thevats.f2s.com
 
Your English is pretty damn good I know English people who are much worse than you. Same goes for all the of the guys who aren't native English speakers on this board.

I'd just like to say that I detest MS office its slow, clunky and takes up WAY too much hard disc space.

http://www.crosswinds.net/~crazyvasey/
 
Well, Word is the only Microshaft programme I don't get any double feelings from.
 
>[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Sep-18-00
>AT 01:56 PM (GMT)
>
>>That is because Office wasn't made
>>for the "normal user".
>Hm, at least it's promoted like
>something which everyone could not
>live without (the same with
>all microsoft products)
>

And the damn bitches achieves their objectives!

>>And that is why I bought
>>the pirate version at $0.
>*Writes something to his notebook*
>

;-)

>>Hehe... Word6 takes like 5 or
>>7 seconds to load, Word
>>2000 takes less than 2.
>>The same with Outlook.
>*I* *doubt*
>

Hehe, my computer acts in mysterious ways... Really, I have Office 97 Pro and Office 2000 Premium and O2k works A LOT more faster than O97!

Anyway, if I say that, it's because it happens with me, there's no need to doubt, Doc.

>>>This improvement should be done with
>>>a patch, not with a
>>>newer version of a program.
>>>Oh c'mon! Stop excusing Microsoft's
>>>money thirst!
>>>
>>
>>Of course I agree with you!!
>>And not only that, I
>>think that, as being one
>>of the most well-known and
>>important computer companies, their programs
>>shouldn't even have bugs at
>>all.
>Isn't that imposs.. whait, it IS
>possible.
>

Of course, like TMS programs :P

>>But we're talking about how their
>>programs improved on versions, and
>>there's a fact that those
>>two Microsoft products (office and
>>VB) improved on higher versions,
>>in a way or another,
>>they improved.
>First of all, the word 'improve'
>have multple meanings. A program
>can 'improve' either when it
>becomes more powerful, or when
>it becomes more stable, or
>when it becomes easier and
>more convenient to use.
>

I started programming VB with the third version, I get thru VB4, VB5 and VB6 and I can tell you that VB 'improved' in all the ways you mention.

And from Office, I started using the 97 version, and I can tell you that the 2000 works better in my computer (faster and more stable).

>>I admire Microsoft just for one
>>thing. Marketing. Those bitches crushed
>>all its opponents not because
>>their programs were great, but
>>because they found the best
>>way to make their programs
>>reach the computer user.
>True
>

Wh..? WHAT?! You agreed with me??? ;)))))

>>Umm.. no no, hehehe, maybe you're
>>right... I just wanted to
>>say that VB 6 was
>>impressively more powerfull THAN VB
>>3, not cpp. :))))
>hehehe
>
>>VB will *never* of the *nevers*
>>be as powerfull as CPP.
>>Although, it can achieve its
>>flexibility, never its power of
>>control.
>yup
>
>>They're facts, Doc, not promises.
>How do you know?
>

Because they're already programmed, beta came out some months ago and there're lots of articles about that.

And I say 'facts' because they're language improvements, they say "we added those functions to VB", not "it's faster and more stable than previous versions"

>
>>First, yes, I commited a mistake.
>>They're installed from Windows 98
>>(first version) and higher.
>>Second, they aren't "all". It's just
>>ONE file. MSVBVM60.dll
>Only one of all the runtimes,
>supplied with only windows 98...
>ok, let it be an
>advantage. A SMALL advantage. :)
>

No no, VB runtime"s" is just one file! You said "blah blah all the VB runtimes blah blah", they aren't "all", VB runtimes is one file.

>
>>Ignorance is dangerous for the one
>>who needs the knowledge, that
>>is all.
>Dammit MatuX, just read the damn
>book! That's too long to
>explain here, especially with my
>level of english :)
>

Uuuhhh.... okay.


[p align=center]
MatuX
Co-Leader and Chief Programmer on
http://clanfusionn.hypermart.net/tmslogo1.gif
[font size=1]GFX by Smackrazor
[font size=2]http://www.modsquad.f2s.com[/p]
 
>You'd expect that but the opposite
>is true: The more
>bloated a software company, the
>less it has to concern
>itself with creating bugless software.
> Microsoft knows that it
>is simply putting out their
>software that makes them their
>money, not the *quality* of
>the software. That's why
>they can get away with
>releasing their untested beta software
>to the public and making
>them pay for patch upgrades
>(Win98 and Win98se) citing that
>they are new software.
>

That's a hell of a true...

Did you know that Windows 95 is Windows 4.0 and Windows 98 is Windows 4.1??
Win98Se is Windows 4.1.higher-number
and WinMe is Windows 4.9 (I remember I read it but I'm not sure)

And the comic part is that they make people pay $200 for each one!

>Well, I have to say that
>Internet Explorer *is* better than
>Navigator. Navigator takes a
>year to load, doesn't have
>enough features and even the
>Linux version has some of
>the bugs the Windows one
>does.
>

Yes, I agree with you, but the saddest thing is that Explorer isn't a good browser, and Navigator is worse!

>How ironic that they made people
>pay for it and now
>they give away the source
>code.
>

And Microsoft forced them...

>-Xotor-
>
>[div align=center]

>http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
>[/div]



[p align=center]
MatuX
Co-Leader and Chief Programmer on
http://clanfusionn.hypermart.net/tmslogo1.gif
[font size=1]GFX by Smackrazor
[font size=2]http://www.modsquad.f2s.com[/p]
 
>>You'd expect that but the opposite
>>is true: The more
>>bloated a software company, the
>>less it has to concern
>>itself with creating bugless software.
>> Microsoft knows that it
>>is simply putting out their
>>software that makes them their
>>money, not the *quality* of
>>the software. That's why
>>they can get away with
>>releasing their untested beta software
>>to the public and making
>>them pay for patch upgrades
>>(Win98 and Win98se) citing that
>>they are new software.
>>
>
>That's a hell of a true...
>
>
>Did you know that Windows 95
>is Windows 4.0 and Windows
>98 is Windows 4.1??
>Win98Se is Windows 4.1.higher-number
>and WinMe is Windows 4.9 (I
>remember I read it but
>I'm not sure)

I have Win98se, but haven't paid for a single Microsoft operating system since version 3.3 of MSDOS was included on my old 386-sx. I simply refuse to buy an operating system that doesn't operate.

>And the comic part is that
>they make people pay
>$200 for each one!

Well.. only $50 for SE...

>Yes, I agree with you, but
>the saddest thing is that
>Explorer isn't a good browser,
>and Navigator is worse!

I dunno, of all the products that Microsoft has made, the only one that I actually like is IE, it does everything for me and is one of the applications that actually loads up quite fast.

>And Microsoft forced them...

Or rather it was a last ditch effort to garner support from the Open Source community. Face it, Navigator lost, IE won. What used to be a 75% market share is now something like 25%. I will only use the better software, and IE is simply better.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
>Hehe, my computer acts in mysterious
>ways... Really, I have Office
>97 Pro and Office 2000
>Premium and O2k works A
>LOT more faster than O97!
>
>
>Anyway, if I say that, it's
>because it happens with me,
>there's no need to doubt,
>Doc.
If it only happens to YOU, this doesn't prove anything. This has to be proved by several testers. I don't know what's hell wrong with your computer.

>Of course, like TMS programs :P
any relation to this?
http://www.pipboy2000le.f2s.com/forum/general/index.pl?read=55

>I started programming VB with the
>third version, I get thru
>VB4, VB5 and VB6 and
>I can tell you that
>VB 'improved' in all the
>ways you mention.
Wasn't that you who said that 'it has lost the status of a newbies toy'? So, it *has* become less convenient and esay to use! Gotcha!

>Because they're already programmed, beta came
>out some months ago and
>there're lots of articles about
>that.
>
>And I say 'facts' because they're
>language improvements, they say "we
>added those functions to VB",
>not "it's faster and more
>stable than previous versions"
Ok

>No no, VB runtime"s" is just
>one file! You said "blah
>blah all the VB runtimes
>blah blah", they aren't "all",
>VB runtimes is one file.
What the hell are you talking about? Aren't there different versions?!

>>Dammit MatuX, just read the damn
>>book! That's too long to
>>explain here, especially with my
>>level of english :)
>>
>
>Uuuhhh.... okay.
just do it

~Dr. W95
the Super-Puper Admin
http://www.thevats.f2s.com
 
>>Hehe, my computer acts in mysterious
>>ways... Really, I have Office
>>97 Pro and Office 2000
>>Premium and O2k works A
>>LOT more faster than O97!
>>
>>
>>Anyway, if I say that, it's
>>because it happens with me,
>>there's no need to doubt,
>>Doc.
>If it only happens to YOU,
>this doesn't prove anything. This
>has to be proved by
>several testers. I don't know
>what's hell wrong with your
>computer.
>

"What the hell is wrong with your computer"

Hehehe, there *has* to be something wrong with my computer for M$ programs run fast and efficient! ;-)

Anyway, it proves that Office runs like I said in *my* computer.

>>Of course, like TMS programs :P
>any relation to this?
>http://www.pipboy2000le.f2s.com/forum/general/index.pl?read=55
>

:D!!!

>>I started programming VB with the
>>third version, I get thru
>>VB4, VB5 and VB6 and
>>I can tell you that
>>VB 'improved' in all the
>>ways you mention.
>Wasn't that you who said that
>'it has lost the status
>of a newbies toy'? So,
>it *has* become less convenient
>and esay to use! Gotcha!
>

Yes, it lost its 'newbies toy' status because it improved in all versions making it a powerfull language...

What's your point?

>>No no, VB runtime"s" is just
>>one file! You said "blah
>>blah all the VB runtimes
>>blah blah", they aren't "all",
>>VB runtimes is one file.
>What the hell are you talking
>about? Aren't there different versions?!
>

Yes, but it's just one file.


[p align=center]
MatuX
Co-Leader and Chief Programmer on
http://clanfusionn.hypermart.net/tmslogo1.gif
[font size=1]GFX by Smackrazor
[font size=2]http://www.modsquad.f2s.com[/p]
 
>>And the comic part is that
>>they make people pay
>>$200 for each one!
>
>Well.. only $50 for SE...
>

Oooooohh!! *ONLY* $50? Thanks for remarking that! Hope that Fallout Tactics' patches don't cost $50... ;-)


[p align=center]
MatuX
Co-Leader and Chief Programmer on
http://clanfusionn.hypermart.net/tmslogo1.gif
[font size=1]GFX by Smackrazor
[font size=2]http://www.modsquad.f2s.com[/p]
 
Microsoft....

>>>And the comic part is that
>>>they make people pay
>>>$200 for each one!
>>
>>Well.. only $50 for SE...
>>
>
>Oooooohh!! *ONLY* $50? Thanks for remarking
>that! Hope that Fallout Tactics'
>patches don't cost $50... ;-)

You have to admit though, it is pretty rare to see anything that patches the operating system significantly (in Microsoft terms) costing less than $100.

I can understand charging $100+ for Win95. That was a major change from DOS.

What I don't think is right is charging the same price for Win98 and Win98se. There is nothing that warrants charging anything. No major improvements except the stability that should have been in Win95 anyway (and it isn't like it is much stabler). All that really changed was the ability to integrate Active Desktop which is available by using IE 4 with Win95 (notice that IE 4 is not available anymore and IE 5+ doesn't add Active Desktop).

The sad thing is that they get away with it.

What the government needs to do is require software companies to follow standards that are imposed on companies like Firestone Tires: If the product has too many defects the company MUST fix it and/or refund the user or incure hefty fines. Windows has already cost the world decillions in man-hours lost, is it not a hazard to humans? How about all the problems caused by systems going down? I'm sure lives were lost at some point because of Windows.

THAT's what I'd like to see the government working on, not some monopoly breakup which won't ever surface for years.

I believe that monopolies are perfectly acceptable if the monopolizing company provides very good products at reasonable prices. That really isn't a monopoly at all, the consumer has decided what they want. They can't help it if they're so good that competitors find it futile to even try to compete. Unfortunately that isn't the way with Microsoft, their products suck.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Microsoft....

>(notice that IE 4 is not available anymore and IE 5+ doesn't add Active Desktop).

That's not true. IE 4 may not be available through Microsoft (I don't know), but it is through other channels ( http://download.cnet.com for instance).
 
RE: hmm..

heh heh. Ok, here's the story:

On wednesday I had my first(in this year) lesson in the newly redesigned computer class. This year we'll have to study Power Point instead of Norton Commander. According to the new teacher, that's supposed to help us improve and perfect ourselves. :) So, the damn teacher asked:
- Who doesn't have Office at home?
- Suppose, I don't, - I said, the single person in the whole class.
- What do you do on your computer then? Play?


~Dr. W95
the Super-Puper Admin
http://www.thevats.f2s.com
 
RE: hmm..

>first, that's *he*, second, have that ever
>helped?

Yes, it makes them get furious with you and they can't do anything because you didn't show disrespect to him.
And they can't fuck you on the marks because you already know a lot ;-)

Use your superior powers to manipulate others' mind!


[p align=center]
MatuX
Co-Leader and Chief Programmer on
http://clanfusionn.hypermart.net/tmslogo1.gif
[font size=1]GFX by Smackrazor
[font size=2]http://www.modsquad.f2s.com[/p]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top