MS, AT&T, IBM

[Mark Jerde]

I was born before 1960 and was young when the IBM and AT&T
monopolies were broken. I was at a biometrics standards meeting
today and one of the informal pre-meeting discussions was on MS
v IBM v AT&T. One viewpoint was:

"IBM, AT&T & MS were all monopolies, but IBM and AT&T were at
least interested in their customers."
- The mainframe computer may have been expensive, but when
there was a problem, IBM had technicians coming in by parachute.
- The phone may have been expensive, but AT&T would get you a
dial tone.
- MS, on the other hand, ....



I admit it. I worked long and hard to master VB Classic
(versions 2-6), COM, DCOM, VC++6, & ATL. I wrote "niche"
software that was successfully deployed worldwide. I resent
that MS, by fiat, has obsoleted my hard-won knowledge. I agree
that eventually .NET will benefit me as a software developer,
but I also believe that *MY* benefit of .NET dominance is
0.000004% of the benefit of MS's .NET dominance. That is to
say, my impression is that MS went with .NET because it benefits
MS, not their users or developers.

My (argumentative ;-) viewpoint is this:
"Microsoft is a functional monopoly. They are abusing their
monopoly. They are acting as a non-benevolent monarchy."

My question is:
"Is Microsoft qualified to lead us into the 'Promised Land'?"

Personal option for argument's sake: Had MS given a d*mn about
their customers they'd have gone with Java and J2EE rather than
creating functionally identical but incompatible strategies.

Comments? (What if all the MS Mensan's had gotten behind Java
& J2EE? Where would computing be today?)

-- Mark

[Kunle Odutola]

"Mark Jerde" <mark.jerde@spicedhamverizon.net> wrote in message
news:VA.00000059.01a6443e@spicedhamverizon.net...

> Personal option for argument's sake: Had MS given a d*mn about
> their customers they'd have gone with Java and J2EE rather than
> creating functionally identical but incompatible strategies.

As I understand it, MS did try to go with Java (even if only to protect
itself). Sun's absolute autocracy was [not suprisingly] unacceptable to the
company that had worked hard for years to win the biggest slice of the pie.
MS felt it could do better and many now believe it has.

> Comments? (What if all the MS Mensan's had gotten behind Java
> & J2EE? Where would computing be today?)

Sun must be kicking itself (in some manner). ;-)

I'm just glad that the additional competition is likely to spur both sides
to produce ever better tools/products.....

Kunle

[Mark Jerde]

> That is to say, my impression is that MS went
> with .NET because it benefits
> MS, not their users or developers.

<snip>

> "Is Microsoft qualified to lead us into the 'Promised Land'?"


For example, MS claims that there are approximately
543,569,334,892,034,994,406,781
PestPort subscribers. My question is, how may are *willing*
subscribers? I'm a subscriber, because at a former job the
employer provided MSDN Universal Subscriptions, and the only way to
access the MSDN site was to have a PestPort subscription. I'm a
subscriber, but d*mnit, they had a gun pointed at my head!
PestPort or no access -- some choice! "No, boss, I didn't download
the update because I didn't want to get a Microsoft Passport
account." Yeah, right. Bye!


Please don't get me wrong. I am not "Anti-MS" just to be
"Anti-MS". Repeat: I am not "Anti-MS" just to be "Anti-MS"!
On the contrary -- I have often used MS as an example of what a
determined group of people can do. (Remember when the press was MS
had missed the internet?) I just wish MS would concentrate on
their core competentencies and form partnerships with all the rest!


For example, I believe that MS has conclusively demonstrated time
after time after time after time after time after time AFTER TIME
AFTER TIME AFTER TIME!!!!! .... that they *cannot* handle
security issues. I'd almost rather post my Visa # on my web site
in clear code as to put it in MS PestPort and assume it will stay
confidential ever and anon! Since they choose to not work well
with other industry leaders, they damage their creditability in
their other areas, areas where they are clearly dominant and
world-leading. "If they insist that their crap security is
excellent, which is clearly isn't, why should I believe the claims
on the rest of the products?"


"Please, MS, realize your place in the
cosmos, and GET ALONG with the others
that are expert in areas you are not!"

This is my viewpoint; this is my plea. Convince me otherwise.

-- Mark

[Mark Jerde]

Kunle,

> As I understand it, MS did try to go with Java (even if only to protect
> itself). Sun's absolute autocracy was [not suprisingly] unacceptable to the
> company that had worked hard for years to win the biggest slice of the pie.
> MS felt it could do better and many now believe it has.

I don't want to excuse Sun -- for all I know, they're as cutthroat as anyone
else. But let me tell you personal experience.... <g>

Many years ago I helped put together the (as far as we know) the world's
first client/server 100% commercial-off-the-shelf fingerprint matching
system. (Grabs diary off the bookshelf to look up dates.) The first
successful test was in San Diego, California, November 7, 1991. That pilot
had 8 PCs connected to 3 engineering workstations. One of the three
workstations was a Sun SparcStation2 running the Informix database. The
second was a Sun SS2 running fingerprint matching. The 3rd workstation was
an HP-720 (one of the VERY first off the line ;-) running fingerprint minutia
extraction. (We played the political card to get the HP-720 running on a
U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service project ;-)

This project was a complete BEAR to get working. At one point I grabbed a
SS2 from my office in Washington, DC, and went to the PC framegrabber
manufacturer in Indianopolis, IN. (Targa) I was met there in Indiana by a
developer of the PC software from a California company. (Compile time for
each Microsoft C++7.0 compile/run: At least 7 minutes!!!!!) We were there
about 2.5 days. The Win3.x PC crashed & crashed & crashed. The Sun SS2
workstation, running ALL THREE FUNCTIONS (!!!!!!) (Informix, matching, &
extraction) stayed up the entire time. Not a single hiccup! Not a single
problem.

Fast forward to 2001. I'm a partner in a biometrics consulting firm:
http://www.idtechpartners.com
A partner and I travel to another country to assess a biometrics
implementation. The client is running an important ID system. The "guts" of
the system is running on two separate Sun multiple-processor computers
running Oracle. The client also has fingerprint matching running on a
4-processor Compaq WinNT 4.0 computer, as the vendor of the particular
fingerprint matching system runs only on WinTel.
- The Sun Oracle computers never never NEVER have problems.
- The NT 4.0 computer has problems. Blue Screen-of-Death, etc.


I worked on DEC PDP languages in the 1970's. I worked on SCO Unix, HP-UX,
Sun-OX, and Windows in the 1980's & 1990's. I worked on *.nix and Windows in
the 2000's. IMHO:
- Windows is very appropriate "for UI & 'The Masses'".
- *nix is appropriate for essential data.
- Windows and *nix can work & play well together when egos are set aside
;-)

Why can't we all get along? <g>

-- Mark

[Mark Jerde]

> I worked on DEC PDP languages in the 1970's. I worked on SCO Unix, HP-UX,
> Sun-OX, and Windows in the 1980's & 1990's. I worked on *.nix and Windows in
> the 2000's. IMHO:
> - Windows is very appropriate "for UI & 'The Masses'".
> - *nix is appropriate for essential data.
> - Windows and *nix can work & play well together when egos are set aside
> ;-)
>
> Why can't we all get along? <g>

I am over 40 years of age. I would (and do) trust Sun/Oracle for my medication
tracking needs. I don't trust DOS / Win3.x / MSAccess / Win9x. ".NET Uber
Alles" is *NOT* where I want to go today.

Does MS understand that when I go to the grocery store I don't want to by Ford
Coffee and Ford Instant Mashed Potatoes and Ford Bread and Ford Tomato Soup and
Ford Milk and Ford Cherry Ice Cream and Ford Eggs and Ford Ham and Ford Doritos
and Ford Coca-Cola? I don't want "One grocery store under Ford" and I don't
want "One computer system under Microsoft." IMHO MS should concentrate on its
strengths rather than persuing its demonstrated "mediocrity everywhere"
strategy.

-- Mark

[David A. Rothgery]

Mark Jerde <mark.jerde@spicedhamverizon.net> wrote:
> For example, MS claims that there are approximately
> 543,569,334,892,034,994,406,781
> PestPort subscribers.

And I'm two of them (not that I have a problem with this).

--
Dave Rothgery
Picking nits since 1976
drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
http://drothgery.editthispage.com

[Mark Jerde]

P.S.

> IMHO MS should concentrate on its strengths

Do you want to be sitting in seat 16E, 1/2 way down the runway,
doing 115 knots, and hear the airline captain come on the
intercom, "We are running MS WinME to control the ailerons,
rudder, elevators, & engines ... " ???

-- Mark

[Mark Jerde]

David,

> I'm two of them (not that I have a problem with this).

So you trust MS with your private info? (Not that I have a
problem with that... ;-)

-- Mark

[Who Cares?]

"Mark Jerde" <mark.jerde@spicedhamverizon.net> wrote in message
news:VA.00000059.01a6443e@spicedhamverizon.net...
>
> Personal option for argument's sake: Had MS given a d*mn about
> their customers they'd have gone with Java and J2EE rather than
> creating functionally identical but incompatible strategies.


That's how I see it. MS has proven that they're
willing to "do anything to win", including the
sacrifice of some of their own customers
and developers.

[Kunle Odutola]

"Mark Jerde" <mark.jerde@spicedhamverizon.net> wrote in message
news:VA.0000005b.01fc972b@spicedhamverizon.net...

> Kunle,

Hey Mark,

> The Win3.x PC crashed & crashed & crashed. The Sun SS2
> workstation, running ALL THREE FUNCTIONS (!!!!!!) (Informix, matching, &
> extraction) stayed up the entire time. Not a single hiccup! Not a single
> problem.

Windows 3.x was *definitely* not suitable for mission critical , server
processes.
Of course, it wasn't aimed at that market either....

> - The Sun Oracle computers never never NEVER have problems.
> - The NT 4.0 computer has problems. Blue Screen-of-Death, etc.

While NT had it's own problems (not aided by funky SPs), my experience is
different to yours. It stood up to 24x7 pretty well. Win2K is even better. I
have no qualms with Un*x (Solaris/Linux/SCO/HP-UX) either. Except on the
price and poorer dev tools. Kudos to FSF/GNU....

> I worked on DEC PDP languages in the 1970's. I worked on SCO Unix, HP-UX,
> Sun-OX, and Windows in the 1980's & 1990's. I worked on *.nix and Windows
in
> the 2000's. IMHO:
> - Windows is very appropriate "for UI & 'The Masses'".
> - *nix is appropriate for essential data.
> - Windows and *nix can work & play well together when egos are set
aside
> ;-)

IMO, Windows 2000/XP competes favourably with Un*xes on the desktop and
servers. As a server OS, it stacks up as well - compare Un*x and Windows on
the same hardware and you'll get my drift. Once again though, hardware
scalability is an issue because Un*x runs on vastly more hardware than
Windows especially those high-end Un*x servers that can take more than 32
CPUs. Fortunately (for MS), most situations/solutions do not need (or
benefit from) that kind of horse-power in a single box, especially when you
consider the prices.

Kunle

[Kunle Odutola]

"Mark Jerde" <mark.jerde@spicedhamverizon.net> wrote in message
news:VA.0000005c.02223d5d@spicedhamverizon.net...

> I am over 40 years of age. I would (and do) trust Sun/Oracle for my
medication
> tracking needs. I don't trust DOS / Win3.x / MSAccess / Win9x.

DOS? Win 3.x? Win9x? In 2002?

I guess you still using SunOS and Oracle 6 right?

Kunle

[Kunle Odutola]

"Mark Jerde" <mark.jerde@spicedhamverizon.net> wrote in message
news:VA.0000005d.02314353@spicedhamverizon.net...
> P.S.
>
> > IMHO MS should concentrate on its strengths
>
> Do you want to be sitting in seat 16E, 1/2 way down the runway,
> doing 115 knots, and hear the airline captain come on the
> intercom, "We are running MS WinME to control the ailerons,
> rudder, elevators, & engines ... " ???

Nope. Isn't that WinCE's job. Win9x/Me wasn't made for that you know,
neither was Solaris or Oracle.....

Kunle

[David A. Rothgery]

Mark Jerde <mark.jerde@spicedhamverizon.net> wrote:
> David,
>
> > I'm two of them (not that I have a problem with this).
>
> So you trust MS with your private info? (Not that I have a
> problem with that... ;-)

The information that's associated with my Passport is either
1) convenientally available to anyone with a phone book OR
2) things that only Microsoft has any use for (like the ID# for my MSDN
subscription)

--
Dave Rothgery
Picking nits since 1976
drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
http://drothgery.editthispage.com

[Phil Weber]

> Comments? (What if all the MS Mensan's had gotten
> behind Java & J2EE? Where would computing be today?)

Mark: I believe MS tried that with Visual J++, arguably the best Java
implementation for Windows at the time, and Sun shot them down. I wonder if
we would even have .NET today if Sun had been willing to compete, rather
than go running to the courts?
---
Phil Weber

[Phil Weber]

> So you trust MS with your private info?

Mark: What private info? All that's required to obtain a Passport is an
e-mail address and password.
---
Phil Weber