🚀 go-pugleaf

mobergru@oslonett.no (Rune Moberg) wrote:

>In article <4f92nd$1e3i@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>,
>stevez1@ibm.net (Steven R. Zuch) wrote:
>>MS has an FAQ re: VB4 distribution size, whereby they state
>>that many of the VB OCXs will be part of the next operating
>>system.  Not only can MS do this and incorporate VBRUN

>MS (or rather Dave Cutler, I think that was his name) is working
>hard on getting NT 4.0 to run well with only 8Mb of RAM installed.
>This time he's trying to incorporate GDI into the kernel, reducing
>memory footprint and increasing speed/performance.

>The sizemaniac aka VB 4.0 doesn't fit into that strategy.

My point was that MS can, and IMHO will, incorporate more
OLE2 and OCXs into their next operating system, and therefore,
the need to distribute so much run time stuff with VB 4 will
not be required.  VB may even become bundled with the
next OS, just like QBasic became bundled with DOS.


>>must nice having such monopolistic power.  MS can kill
>>development tools and applications by incorporating them
>>into the operating system, just like IBM once bundled software
>>with their mainframe boxes.  History repeats itself.

>I fail to see how that strategy can help MS sell operating systems.

>In case you haven't noticed, MS' selling point these days is that
>"we have all the applications", if they kill them off, developers
>are highly likely to develop for other platforms.

My point was that if a third party has a nice software program,
MS may be able to incorporate the best of such into the
operating system.  Development languages may fall into
this area.  MS has been incorporating disk defragmenters,
backup software, compression, desktop file managers,
fax software, etc ... into Windows, regardless how the
developers felt.

>Delphi 1.0 has features that might surface in VB5 or 6, and 2.0
>will be shipping this month...

>Delphi 2.0 has form inheritance, multithreading, an even more optimizing
>compiler (check their web page for details. It's awesome!) and improved
>database controls (Delphi 1.0 already beats VB4 hands down).

Thanks for the info.  What does that have to do with my comments?
Delphi does have many features that VB does not.  But, MS is
not goint to incorporate Delphi into their Desktop suite, or their
operating system, unless they buy Borland, and Gates learns
to love Pascal over Basic :).