kluksdah@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Keith Kluksdahl) (12/08/89)
Does anyone out there have an opinion on Desqview vs Windows? That's kind of a dumb question. Of course you have an opinion on this question. The better question might be, will anyone out there share their opinion on Desqview vs Windows? Thanks /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ | These views are my own, but I may | Keith Kluksdahl | | be re-programmed tomorrow........ | HP Bedford Falls | \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Tested tough in Alaska. |<---------- So Long ---------->|
hadgraft@civeng.monash.edu.au (Roger Hadgraft) (12/11/89)
In article <1640035@hpspcoi.HP.COM>, kluksdah@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Keith Kluksdahl) writes: > Does anyone out there have an opinion on Desqview vs Windows? > That's kind of a dumb question. Of course you have an opinion > on this question. The better question might be, will anyone > out there share their opinion on Desqview vs Windows? > There have been a number of questions comments along these lines (DesqView vs Windows), as if they were comparable products. You seem to be missing the point. If you simply want to task switch between DOS applications, buy DesqView. If you want an integrated, user interface, in which applications present a standard, menu-based interface, buy Windows. To get the most out of Windows, you have to junk your old DOS applications, and acquire a set of true Windows applications (like Excel, PageMaker, Word, etc). Sure, you can run DOS applications under Windows, but its real advantages show when you are using predominantly Windows applications. -- Roger Hadgraft | hadgraft@civeng.monash.edu.au Lecturer in Civil Engineering | phone: +61 3 565 4983 Monash University | fax: +61 3 565 3409 Clayton, Vic. 3168. Australia. |
mlord@bmers58.UUCP (Mark Lord) (12/12/89)
In article <12238@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au> hadgraft@civeng.monash.edu.au (Roger Hadgraft) writes: >In article <1640035@hpspcoi.HP.COM>, kluksdah@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Keith Kluksdahl) writes: >> Does anyone out there have an opinion on Desqview vs Windows? >... >If you simply want to task switch between DOS applications, buy DesqView. > >If you want an integrated, user interface, in which applications present a >standard, menu-based interface, buy Windows. To get the most out of Windows, you >have to junk your old DOS applications, and acquire a set of true Windows >applications (like Excel, PageMaker, Word, etc). Sure, you can run DOS Also, as discussed before, The other way to get the most out of Windows is to run Windows286 under Desqview386 on a 386 machine. This gives true multitasking, with the reliable version of windows, and also makes multitasking non-windows stuff possible. This combination works very well! Cheers, -Mark -- +----------------------------------------+----------------------------+ | Mark S. Lord | Hey, It's only MY opinion. | | ..!utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!mlord%bmers58 | Feel free to have your own.| +----------------------------------------+----------------------------+
jmann@bigbootay (Jim Mann) (12/12/89)
Word does not yet run under Windows. In fact, I've always thought that the biggest strike against windows was that Microsoft, while encouraging (?) others to write for Windows, has not yet provided Windows support for their most popular word processor. The (?) after encouraging in the above paragraph is because I really don't think Microsoft has done more than talk up writing for Windows. If I want to write an application that uses the Mac interface, I just have to buy a good cheap compiler (Think's Lightspeed C, for example). The toolbox routines, which provide windowing support, menuing, etc. are all basic to the Mac. If I want to write for Windows, I not only have to buy the compiler but have to shell out $350 or thereabouts for the Windows development kit. This is fine for big companies that want to port their work to Windows. It's not so good for someone who just wants to hack around a bit, and learn a bit more about how to write for Windows.
stanwass@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (12/14/89)
Word for Windows was recently released (like just this month).
stv@qvax2.UUCP (Steve Vance@ex2499) (12/15/89)
In article <1640035@hpspcoi.HP.COM> kluksdah@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Keith Kluksdahl) writes: > The better question might be, will anyone >out there share their opinion on Desqview vs Windows? This is an easy one. Desqview and Windows both do multi-tasking, and both cost about the same. The big difference is that Desqview will essentially run ANY DOS PROGRAM that you are currently using. To run a program under Windows, you need to have a $pecial Windows version. Also, Windows needs a more in the way of system resources in order to be able to run. The only people I have seen that prefer Windows are Software Developers who are writing programs that will run under Windows. -- Steve Vance {hplabs,lll-winken,pacbell}!qantel!stv qantel!stv@lll-winken.llnl.gov Qantel Business Computers, Hayward, CA
wayne.ho@f526.n250.z1.fidonet.org (wayne ho) (12/17/89)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Microsoft just recently released
an MS Word for Windows which supports WYSIWYG, etc., etc.
Wayne
--- ConfMail V3.31
* Origin: MeTaStAsIo'S -`Not ready error reading drive A' (416)487-9093 (1:250/526)schaut@cat9.cs.wisc.edu (Richard Schaut) (12/18/89)
In article <640@qvax2.UUCP> stv@qvax2.UUCP (Steve Vance@ex2499) writes: | In article <1640035@hpspcoi.HP.COM> kluksdah@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Keith Kluksdahl) writes: | > The better question might be, will anyone | >out there share their opinion on Desqview vs Windows? | | This is an easy one. Desqview and Windows both do multi-tasking, and | both cost about the same. The big difference is that Desqview will | essentially run ANY DOS PROGRAM that you are currently using. To run | a program under Windows, you need to have a $pecial Windows version. | Also, Windows needs a more in the way of system resources in order to | be able to run. This isn't entirely correct. I've run Procomm _in_ a window, and have run the Turbo C IDE at full screen without any problems at all. I can't say that _all_ msdos programs will run under Windows, but I can't think of any more hostile to the Windows environment than those two. Also, if you have a LIM 4.0 memory board, Windows' lust for memory is inconsequential. From a programmer's standpoint, Windows is definitely the way to go because of its close relationship to the OS/2 Presentation Manager. Write a program for one environment, and you've virtually written a program for the other. -- Rick "Any questions? Any answers? Anyone care for a mint?" -- Rita Rudner
caprio@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Mike Caprio) (01/13/90)
> >From a programmer's standpoint, Windows is definitely the way to go because >of its close relationship to the OS/2 Presentation Manager. Write a >program for one environment, and you've virtually written a program for the >other. > As I understand it, programming for Windows and PM, turned out to be far more different than MS had promised. None of the functions calls are the same, etc. It will apparently be a major hassle to bring a program over to PM after designing it for Windows :-(
dar@nucleus.mi.org (Dario Alcocer) (01/16/90)
In article <6138@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>, caprio@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Mike Caprio) writes: > > > >From a programmer's standpoint, Windows is definitely the way to go because > >of its close relationship to the OS/2 Presentation Manager. Write a > >program for one environment, and you've virtually written a program for the > >other. > > > As I understand it, programming for Windows and PM, turned out to be > far more different than MS had promised. None of the functions calls are > the same, etc. It will apparently be a major hassle to bring a program > over to PM after designing it for Windows :-( From what I've heard, you're right about a Windows-to-PM port not being so easy as Microsoft first expected. Maybe because of this, Micrographx has been working on something to make it easier; According to Charles Petzold: "Moreover, Micrographx (the creators of several good Windows programs) has benn working on a product called Mirrors that will help Windows programmers convert their programs to the Presentation Manager. It involves recompiling the Windows program, using and OS/2 dynamic link library to convert the Windows function calls to PM function calls." -- Charles Petzold, "Windows and PM: Friendly Companions or Deadly Competitors", PC Magazine, Dec. 12, 1989, vol. 8 no. 21 Also, this was mentioned in an article in Info World ("Microsoft Tells Developers of Plan To Let Windows Apps Run Under PM", Info World, v. 12, n. 1), and I guess MS and Micrographx are working on an implementation in an upcoming release of OS/2. -- -- Dario Alcocer (San Diego, CA) INTERNET: dar@nucleus.mi.org voice: 619-450-1667