vanzandt@uiucdcsp.UUCP (02/21/87)
I'm interested in any comments concerning MicroSoft Windows. I just picked up a copy of Version 1.03 and it seems interesting. But, the documentation is a little shaky of PIF files. Would be interested in stories about what files Windows works with, PIF setups for various files, and general comments... +=============================================================================+ | Lonnie VanZandt University of Illinois Dept. of CS (217) 333-1925 | | | | arpa vanzandt@p.cs.uiuc.edu vanzandt@uiuc.ARPA | | csnet vanzandt@uiuc.csnet | | usenet ihnp4!uiucdcs!vanzandt | +=============================================================================+
phil@sci.UUCP (02/23/87)
In article <75800026@uiucdcsp>, vanzandt@uiucdcsp.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > I'm interested in any comments concerning MicroSoft Windows. I > just picked up a copy of Version 1.03 and it seems interesting. But, the > documentation is a little shaky of PIF files. Would be interested in > stories about what files Windows works with, PIF setups for various files, > and general comments... > +=============================================================================+ I've just recently started playing with ms-windows. I got it because Micrographix Windows Draw is the closest thing on the PC to Mac-Draw on the Mac. Windows has a few good points and lots of bad ones. On the good side, MS marketing is making it a standard so there are quite a few new programs written especially for it. It nicely supports a mouse and provides a common interface across applications. On the bad side, it definitely is not a Mac paradigm - pull downs do not work as well as MAc for ease of use. The windows themselves are not very flexible in sizing and they tile - they do not overlap! Windows is excruciatingly slow on anything less than a fast AT. Handling of standard (non-windows) applications is poor and not reliable (installing programs that use the full screen is supposed to let you jump back and iconize them - this often works ONCE after the program is loaded and then stops working). Personally, for practical work I much prefer Deskview which is much faster and has real windows and multitasking although it provides no real environment support such as menues. Gem looks nice but i have no experience with it. How about an exchange of views on DOS environments from all of you out there who have experience with these programs?
rps@homxc.UUCP (02/24/87)
In article <75800026@uiucdcsp>, vanzandt@uiucdcsp.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > > > I'm interested in any comments concerning MicroSoft Windows. I > just picked up a copy of Version 1.03 and it seems interesting. But, the > documentation is a little shaky of PIF files. Would be interested in > stories about what files Windows works with, PIF setups for various files, > and general comments... > I used MS Windows (actually AT&T's relable of it) for about 2 months. I came to the following conclusions: 1. to use a word processor under windows it either has to be graphically oriented, so it can run in a window, or all of windows disapears and has to reload (which is not a quick process). So I used their Windows Write package which is ok (a lot like MacWrite) but cumbersome and tedious. And it does not produce very good ascii files (all the lines are 256 characters long). If it was all you would ever use it might be all right but it is a pain if you frequently transport documents from one word processor to another. I use PC-Write now. 2. The card file is a handy way to store phone numbers and such but produces a lousy print out. It tries to print each card as a 3 X 5 card using graphics on the epson printer. There is no way to just get a list of the data. 3. Windows really is multitasking and this works very well. It is possible to have several terminal sessions going and a Write open, etc. 4. Setting up the PIF files is very hard. I never could get on for the DOS sort utility (this is what was finally the last straw). It took me hours (no, days!) to get the microsoft C compiler 4.0 to run in a window. This is generally true about any software. If it is poorly behaved software, forget it! 5. changing directories is a real pain, in fact most of routine windows administrative functions require the use of multiple dialog boxes and/or pop-up menus which must be accessed with mouse. Some then require keyboard input. It is slow and tedious. 6. I ran windows on a ATT6300+ (in dos mode, no unix) which is 7.2 x as fast as a IBM PC (according to Peter Norton). Rarely did it seem slow. On a PC it would probably be intolerable. In the end I found it just too hard to do what I wanted to. I was wasting too much time trying to get from one directory to another and converting the text format of files etc. I can summarize: If your needs could be well served by the narrow and inflexible (but easy to learn and pleasing to look at) functioning of the Macintosh world, and you are not to used to quick, direct commands in DOS, then you may like MS Windows. If you are a "power user" in DOS, forget it! It is just too much of a waste of time. Russ Sharples homxc!rps AT&T Bell Labs Holmdel, NJ NOTE: The diatribe above in NO WAY reflects the opinions of AT&T who sells the product being discussed. These opinions are my own and the results of un-scientific and highly irregular analysis methods.
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (02/25/87)
Can you spell s--l--o--w? Sure, I knew uou could. I've run windows on the 8 MHz AT compat. in my office and was real disappointed in how slow it is. I've also got GEM (forget the version, but it's pretty old) and it is about twice the speed of windows. My main gripe about GEM is that the daggone menus stay dropped down after you move the mouse off of them (this must have something to do with the Apple Co. look&feel crap). The draw and paint utilites that are included with GEM are miles ahead of the junk that microsoft plams off with windows. For instance, GEM paint is in full living color on an EGA card, while windows paint is primitive (not even full screen) b&w. I have what I assume is a pretty new version of windows, that I've only had for about a month (ver 1.03). I've also seen Ventura Publisher running in GEM on an XT and it was still tolerably fast. I don't think you could get away with it in windows, as the intrinsic overhead from windows is much greater. GEM is also more forgiving about what it will let you run. For instance, I can run windows from inside of GEM. Windows will not let me run GEM from inside of windows. Windows is winning out becuase microsoft has a giant advertising budget, and is providing a lot of help (albeit expensive) help to developers. DR, on the other hand, is not agressively pushing GEM. DR also has taken a lot of bad rap for concurrent DOS, etc. lately which is overshowing the niceness of GEM. Oh well... --Bill Bill Mayhew Division of Basic Medical Sciences Northeastern Ohio Universities' College of Med. Rootstown, OH 44272 USA phone: 216-325-2511 (wtm@neoucom.UUCP ...!cbatt!neoucom!wtm)
flowers@ucla-cs.UUCP (02/26/87)
In article <75800026@uiucdcsp>, vanzandt@uiucdcsp.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > I'm interested in any comments concerning MicroSoft Windows. ... Two articles may interest you. The PC Tech Journal, (I think) Feb 87, has an article which talks about the underlying design and rationale of Windows. PC Mag, I think V5#19, sometime around then, had an article about ram residency, tsr programs, etc. and the various problems which can arise, and then discussed how Windows was really a solution to that all. In article <1953@homxc.UUCP> rps@homxc.UUCP (R.SHARPLES) writes: >I used MS Windows (actually AT&T's relable of it) for about 2 months. I >came to the following conclusions: > > 1. to use a word processor under windows it either has to be > graphically oriented, so it can run in a window, or all of > windows disapears and has to reload (which is not a quick > process). MS Word, in both text and graphics mode, seems to work fine (not surprisingly) > 2. The card file is a handy way to store phone numbers and such > but produces a lousy print out. It tries to print each card as a > 3 X 5 card using graphics on the epson printer. There is no way to > just get a list of the data. Also I found seeing little pictures of 3x5 cards on the screen was silly (taking Macintosh-ization to extremes). SideKick's phone directory is more straightforward. > 3. Windows really is multitasking and this works very well. It is > possible to have several terminal sessions going and a Write open, etc. Yes. I set it up and used it on a Z-181, which has 640K and only two 720K floppies (no hard disk). The icon commands work pretty well and multitasking was pretty nice. > 4. Setting up the PIF files is very hard. I had no problem with this but I only tried it for one program, where it was easy to ascertain core usage. I could see how figuring what to specify might be hard in some cases. > 5. changing directories is a real pain, in fact most of routine > windows administrative functions require the use of multiple dialog boxes > and/or pop-up menus which must be accessed with mouse. Some then > require keyboard input. It is slow and tedious. Yes, doing routine DOS activities requires using the Windows menu & dialog box interface, but no, it does not require a mouse. Everything that can be done by a mouse can be done without it too (I originally installed it before I got my mouse). Turns out some things are more easily done directly with the keyboard than with the mouse, so even with a mouse I often use the keyboard instead. Initially I found the interface cumbersome and less direct than with DOS commands, but as I got used to them I got to be able to be quick at it. > 6. I ran windows on a ATT6300+ (in dos mode, no unix) which is > 7.2 x as fast as a IBM PC (according to Peter Norton). Rarely > did it seem slow. On a PC it would probably be intolerable. The Z-181 is XT compatible, and benchmarks at slightly faster than an IBM-PC. Yes there were noticable delays but nothing different than with other programs on the same machine. It was useful for a few things (switching in and out of word quickly, etc.); but for the most part I've ended up not using it because most of the time I start up I'm using one main application, and don't need the extra layer. Also, many of the features come in SideKick and other desktops, with much less cost in core, filespace, and disk occupation. With a hard disk and more core however I would probably use it however. I think in the future code written to run under windows will be able to be smaller since much of the interface can come from windows itself. > .... If you are a "power user" in DOS, forget it! >It is just too much of a waste of time. Yes, it is probably most palatable to people who want a Macintosh interface. However, note that it is not only a user interface, but an underlying operating environment for programs to run in, and I think many of its strengths are really in this aspect. I found the interface usable but it could stand improvement in the area of dos activities.
michaelm@bcsaic.UUCP (02/27/87)
Let me jump into this discussion and ask a question. Do any of the windowing packages for PC/AT class machines (I assume the answer would be the same for '386-class machines) support programs which can access extended/expanded memory? Or is the program in each window limited to 640k? I'm particularly interested in whether TI's PC-Scheme (an implementation of Scheme which can access up to 2 megs of extended/expanded memory) will access more than 640k under MS Windows, GEM etc. -- Mike Maxwell Boeing Advanced Technology Center arpa: michaelm@boeing.com uucp: uw-beaver!uw-june!bcsaic!michaelm
robert@erix.UUCP (03/02/87)
In article <388@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: > >Can you spell s--l--o--w? Sure, I knew uou could. I've run >windows on the 8 MHz AT compat. in my office and was real >disappointed in how slow it is. I've also got GEM (forget the >version, but it's pretty old) and it is about twice the speed of >windows. My main gripe about GEM is that the daggone menus stay >dropped down after you move the mouse off of them (this must have >something to do with the Apple Co. look&feel crap). The draw and >paint utilites that are included with GEM are miles ahead of the >junk that microsoft plams off with windows. For instance, GEM >paint is in full living color on an EGA card, while windows paint >is primitive (not even full screen) b&w. Yes, and some of the MS software is pretty buggy. Their WRITE can't handle fonts correctly and doesn't always show correctly on the screen what comes out on a printer, especially indentation. I talked to a representative here in Sweden and they consider it "free" software so they don't concentrate on it. They will be coming out with more stuff, a new WRITE and a DRAW, which will be much (?) better but that will cost money. >GEM is also more forgiving about what it will let you run. For >instance, I can run windows from inside of GEM. Windows will not >let me run GEM from inside of windows. This is true. I use GEM as a top level DOS interface. Does anyone know if there is a better WRITE for GEM, one that can handle different size fonts and such? This is what forces me to use MS Windows. Robert Virding @ Ericsson Telecom, Stockholm UUCP: {decvax,philabs,seismo}!mcvax!enea!erix!robert
gervers@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (03/04/87)
>paint utilites that are included with GEM are miles ahead of the >junk that microsoft plams off with windows. For instance, GEM >paint is in full living color on an EGA card, while windows paint >is primitive (not even full screen) b&w. > > >Windows is winning out becuase microsoft has a giant advertising >budget, and is providing a lot of help (albeit expensive) help to >developers. DR, on the other hand, is not agressively pushing GEM. >DR also has taken a lot of bad rap for concurrent DOS, etc. lately >which is overshowing the niceness of GEM. Oh well... > >--Bill > >Bill Mayhew >Division of Basic Medical Sciences >Northeastern Ohio Universities' College of Med. >Rootstown, OH 44272 USA phone: 216-325-2511 >(wtm@neoucom.UUCP ...!cbatt!neoucom!wtm) I have to agree, at one point, I had to make GEM and WINDOWS work on a sanyo mbc 555[vb] and had a chance to compare the two, In terms of graphics, GEM DRAW is miles ahead of Windows Paint, (However, DRAW is I believe, vector based, and PAINT is pixels oriented). The positioning of windows is also more intuitive in GEM than WINDOWS, in WINDOWS, you CANNOT place a window on top of another window, they are always side by side. GEM however, lets you open up to 8 windows. I don't think that GEM is a lot faster than WINDOWS though, everytime you get out of an APPlication, GEMDESK is automatically reloaded and that takes time. indra laksono DEEDS PROJECT Now the real question. Does Ventura Publisher work with LASERJET + ?
neff@hpvcla.HP.COM (Dave Neff) (03/04/87)
If MS Windows is so great, as Microsoft claims, why doesn't Microsoft's own best selling mainstream programs (i.e. MS Word) use Windows? I think the answer is obvious. Dave Neff ihnp4!hpfcla!hpvcla!neff
rps@homxc.UUCP (03/06/87)
In article <1987Mar4.135307.22520@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu>, gervers@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (M. Gervers) writes: (various comments on how GEM DRAW is better than MS Windows Paint) > > I have to agree, at one point, I had to make GEM and WINDOWS work on > a sanyo mbc 555[vb] and had a chance to compare the two, In terms of > graphics, GEM DRAW is miles ahead of Windows Paint, (However, DRAW > is I believe, vector based, and PAINT is pixels oriented). I have worked with Micrografix Windows Draw extensively (it is the best drawing package available for MS windows yet), it is vector based just like GEM DRAW PLUS (they do not make GEM Draw anymore). GEM DRAW PLUS is much easier to use however, it has automatic arrow heads on lines, and most important, the VDI printer driver for dotmatrix printers is fantastic! With the driver that comes with Windows Draw you would be better off holding a piece of paper up to the screen and tracing it. > > The positioning of windows is also more intuitive in GEM than WINDOWS, > in WINDOWS, you CANNOT place a window on top of another window, they > are always side by side. GEM however, lets you open up to 8 windows. Because of the settlement with Apple (!!#$%!**$) GEM is now restricted to having only 2 immovable windows on the desktop and no trashcan. GEM DRAW PLUS can have two side by side windows of any rectangular shape, overlap etc. It can copy between them. > > I don't think that GEM is a lot faster than WINDOWS though, everytime > you get out of an APPlication, GEMDESK is automatically reloaded and > that takes time. > > indra laksono > DEEDS PROJECT > > Now the real question. Does Ventura Publisher work with LASERJET + ? GEM DRAW PLUS has the option of running without the Desktop. I just wish DRI would get behind this product 100%. If they would bring out a word processor with different fonts and a spelling checker (the current GEM WRITE is just straight word processing with formatting, handles pictures from DRAW or PAINT though), plus give GEM DRAW the ability to import ascii text, plus make it so you could have GEM WRITE open in one half the screen and GEM DRAW PLUS open in another, plus a GEM based communications program, I WOULD BUY THE WHOLE PACKAGE!!!!! Russ Sharples homxc!rps
geller@eli.UUCP (David Geller) (03/06/87)
> Now the real question. Does Ventura Publisher work with LASERJET + ?
Yes - in fact, it works exceedingly well - that is if you don't
care about data throughput...
(1) the quality, based upon the inherenet limitations of the 1st
series of Laserjets (yes, series two machines are now available and
the laserjets that we all know and love will be phased out within
6 months - not support mind you, just as product offerings) is very
good. Point sizes up to 24 points.
(2) There is a problem, though. Ventura doesn't retain (in Ver 1.0)
and information about the font data that it used between pages.
That means that you might be sending >300K for some pages (each
page). Yes - this is definitely weird. I finally decided to keep
my laserjet+ working just on the UNIX box with troff and get a
postscript device for the PC.
(3) Downloaded fonts (those made by BitStream and distributed by HP)
look VERY VERY good - far better, I think, than scaled postscript
fonts of the same type and size!
David Geller
Electric Logic, Inc.
Washington, D.C.
Return postage guaranteedjons@islenet.UUCP (03/07/87)
In article <1987Mar4.135307.22520@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> gervers@gpu.utcs.UUCP (M. Gervers) writes: > >indra laksono >DEEDS PROJECT > >Now the real question. Does Ventura Publisher work with LASERJET + ? I would like to read you the requirments straight from the Ventura Publisher manual, Version 1.0: GRAPHICS CARDS - Hercules Graphics, or equivalent - IBM Color Graphics - IBM Enhanced Graphics - Micro Display Systems Genius graphics - Wyse 700 - Xerox 6065 color display adapter - Xerox 6065 full page display - Xerox 6065 monochrome display adapter MICE - Microsoft Mouse (serial or mouse) - Mouse Systems PC Mouse (or following equivalent): - Summagraphics Mouse - Logitek Logi-mouse - Torrington Mouse - Microage Mouse - Xerox 6065 Mouse PRINTERS - Any PostScript compatible printer or typesetter - Apple Laserwriter or Laserwriter Plus - Epson MX-80/FX-80/RX-80 - HP LaserJet Plus * - HP LaserJet w/ 92286F font cartridge - IBM Proprinter - Tall Tree Systems JLaser Printer card and compatible printer (this includes most Canon-based lasers). - Xerox 4020 Color Ink Jet Printer - Xerox 4045 Laser Printer NOTE: VENTURA PUBLISHER WILL NOT WORK UNLESS YOUR COMPUTER CONTAINS THE HARDWARE LISTED ABOVE, INCLUDING A MOUSE AND A GRAPHICS BOARD FROM THE ABOVE LIST. vENTURA PUBLISHER WILL ONLY PRINT ON THE PRINTERS SHOWN. IT WILL NOT WORK WITH A "DAISY WHEEL" TYPE PRINTER. By the way, if anyone is interested, I'll post the new changes to Release 1.1 of the Publisher that was announced by Xerox Wednesday (March 4). It includes more font selections with greater point size selection and greater support for external graphic packages, including MS Windows and Dr. Halo to name a few. In all, over 80 changes have been made. Anyone interested? Aloha, Jonathan Spangler {ihnp4,vortex,dual}!islenet!jons
rmc@teddy.UUCP (03/13/87)
I have used TI PC Scheme under windows. If you write a .PIF file for it, you can even run it IN a window (not dropping into single application mode) for non-graphics commands (Edwin works fine). It accesss either extended or expanded memory as expected, depending upon the version you start. There seems to be about a 10-15% speed penalty on the Gabriel benchmarks for doing this. My guess it is because you have to page expanded memory into the 1MB region more often. The penalty seems worse for using extended memory than for expanded. R Mark Chilenskas ...!decvax!genrad!panda!rmc
pingguo@mhuxt.UUCP (Randall R. Pratt) (01/15/88)
Pardon my ignorance, but the name Microsoft Windows sounds like it might be
a useful piece of software. But I have no idea what it really does. Just
what is MS Windows?
--
Randy Pratt, AT&T Bell Laboratories
..!{allegra,ihnp4}!mhuxt!pingguo
["An apple a day keeps the . . . never mind."]ron@islenet.UUCP (Ron Morse) (01/17/88)
In article <2177@mhuxt.UUCP> pingguo@mhuxt.UUCP (52211-pratt) writes: >Pardon my ignorance, but the name Microsoft Windows sounds like it might be >a useful piece of software. But I have no idea what it really does. Just >what is MS Windows? > Hoo-boy. I'm not real sure anyone else (including Microsoft) has figured that one out. IBM is supposedly trying to build a new operating system out of something that looks like (but is different from) windows. I've got Windows, run it everyday, but I still don't know what it does or why I bought it. Good luck. Aloha from Paradise
emuleomo@paul.rutgers.edu (Emuleomo) (10/28/89)
Dear windows guru,
Is it posible to get an MS windows task to spawn another task which
MS windows will then recognize?
For example I want to write an application which can start up other
applications if the user takes some action.
i.e. something like.....
long FAR PASCAL myWndProc(etc...etc..)
{
switch(user_action)
{
case EXCEL: system("win excel");
case WORD: system("win word");
.
.
etc.. etc..
}
}
Email will be mucho mucho appreciated.
Thanx
--Emuleomo O.O. (emuleomo@yes.rutgers.edu)
--
** The ONLY thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history!tlh@PacBell.COM (Lee Hounshell) (08/28/90)
My brother recently acquired 28 (still shrink-wrapped) packages of Microsoft Windows version 2.11 with manuals and registration cards. The software is for a 3 inch disk drive. Since he doesn't really have a use for 28 copies, he is offering them for sale real cheap.. only $25 a package!! If you are interested, please give him a call or write the address below: Perry Hounshell 6950 Eric Lane, Wheatland, CA 95692 (916) 633-2242 Please don't respond to me as I am just posting this for him.