My appology - this was not meant to get to the list but to SJL alone as
you can see from the first line below.
It is not meant to stir another useless debate unrelated to BRHS or Q
issues.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Almosnino
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 1:22 PM
To: BRHSlist@egroups.com
Subject: RE: [BRHSlist] Microsoft Train Simulator
I am taking this off the list because it has nothing to do with BRHS or
the Q.
It seems that some of your information is outdated (if you heard about
the MS Flight simulator just now).
Quality is always a big concern and thaty includes Microsoft products.
Have you tried Windows 2000? I believe it is a great stride in operating
system quality and reliability and no, you don't need to reboot it
often. Like many other complex systems and products, software gets
better with time and consumer's feedback.
As for Java, your remarks were particularly unfair and one sided.
Microsoft found Java to be sub-standard and it did not provided all the
features and quality it needed. Sun itself disagrees with the
international Java standard and fears losing control over Java
liscencing. Why would you believe and say that anything that replaces
Java would be of inferior quality? Have you seen it yet?
You keep throwing assumptions and speculations without base in facts
(this is true for your Microsoft breakup expectations as well because
the the whole thing is still under appeal). There is nothing wrong in
setting your own standards if these exceed existing ones and provide
better service and value to the customer.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen J. Levine [mailto:sjl@p...]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 12:45 PM
To: BRHSlist@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [BRHSlist] Microsoft Train Simulator
I did hear about the Microsoft's flight simulator this weekend from a
member
of our rail passenger advocacy organization who works for the FAA.
Normally I stick on this list to rail issues, particularly the Q.
However,
we sometimes have to look at a bigger picture, and being involved in
information systems, I am not bashing Microsoft just because I like
bashing
things. I really do not.
However, having been involved in mission critical and life-critical
computer
systems for over 10 years now, I have a really genuine concern about the
quality of microsoft products and the microsoft monopoly. In my
business,
I am used to systems that do not have to be rebooted except when there
are
hardware failures.
I also am really concerned that Microsoft is refusing to go along with
the
international Java standard but is going in their own direction. They
feel
that they have the power to set their own standards (and they do) and
make
everyone else go along, regardless of whether such standards represent a
deterioration of quality or not.
It may however be that, with the breakup of Microsoft, their monopoly
may
not be such a problem. It is interesting that the Microsoft case may be
to
the early 21st Century what the Northern Securities Case (GN+NP+CB&Q)
was to
the early 20th Century.
sjl
Dan Almosnino wrote:
>
> If the MS train simulator will have the quality of MS Flight or Combat
> Flight Simulators, that won't be disappointing at all.
> Microsoft is doing many other games and simulators so the Train
> Simulator should not be a surprize. This never prevented other
companies
> to develop similar, competitive products (some better, some worse).
> Unlike flight simulators, there aren't many train simulators around so
> any addition should be welcomed.
>
> It is unfortunate that SJL's mail below uses the forum for typical bad
> mouthing purposes instead of evaluating the merits of a new train
> simulator (which is not out yet, not even in Beta version).
>
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen J. Levine [mailto:sjl@p...]
> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 1:16 PM
> To: BRHSlist@egroups.com
> Subject: Re: [BRHSlist] Microsoft Train Simulator
>
> What is Microsoft doing in the train simulator business? Is Bill
Gates
> also
> a train buff?
>
> Is this another example of Microsoft's monopolistic urges?
>
> The reason why the question comes up is that Microsoft, already having
> problems with software meeting open system standards, has recently
> announced
> that they are going to drop Java, which is an open system standard,
and
> develop their own proprietary language in its stead. What makes this
> especially bad is that Microsoft has a track record of developing less
> robust systems that end up supplanting more robust ones.
>
> sjl
>
> Ed DeRouin wrote:
>
> > hold-on@s... wrote:
> > >
> > > Ed
> > > Sounds too much like work to Me
> > > SJH
> > >
> > >
> >
> > SJH
> >
> > Did I mention that they paid cash for my opinion?
> >
> > EMD
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|