tmoody@sjuphil.uucp (T. Moody) (05/24/91)
I recently ran the Windows 3.0 setup routine to locate Windows
applications, and an interesting thing happened. It found Microsoft
Word (*not* Word for Windows) and Brief. The odd thing is that I don't
have Brief. I have an editor called "Boxer," a shareware program that I
picked up on CompuServe. Why do you suppose Windows thinks that Boxer
is Brief?
--
Todd Moody * tmoody@sjuphil.sju.edu
"In what furnace was thy brain?" -- William Blakeebergman@isis.cs.du.edu (Eric Bergman-Terrell) (05/24/91)
You're asking why boxers might be confused with briefs? Use your imagination man!!! Terrell
cmdbyk@pmvax.weeg.uiowa.edu (Karl Boyken) (05/24/91)
In article <1991May23.203907.17615@sjuphil.uucp>, tmoody@sjuphil.uucp (T. Moody) writes... >I recently ran the Windows 3.0 setup routine to locate Windows >applications, and an interesting thing happened. It found Microsoft >Word (*not* Word for Windows) and Brief. The odd thing is that I don't >have Brief. I have an editor called "Boxer," a shareware program that I >picked up on CompuServe. Why do you suppose Windows thinks that Boxer >is Brief? I've had a similar thing happen with VEdit; Windows think's it's XyWrite. The answer must be that it _is_ XyWrite, deep in its bowels. It's my understanding that XyWrite can be licensed to develop other apps--Nota Bene is another example, I believe. Windows must use something inside the .EXE file to identify the app, not just the file name--which raises the interesting (and possibly incriminating) question of why Windows thinks a shareware program is Brief. ** _My_ views, no one else's--except those I plagiarize. ** Karl Boyken, Project Analyst | "Distant cousins, there's a limited supply, State Health Registry of Iowa | and we're down to the dozens, and this is why: Iowa City, IA | big-eyed beans from Venus--oh my, oh my!" cmdbyk@pmvax.weeg.uiowa.edu | Captain Beefheart
jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) (05/24/91)
tmoody@sjuphil.uucp (T. Moody) writes: >I recently ran the Windows 3.0 setup routine to locate Windows >applications, and an interesting thing happened. It found Microsoft >Word (*not* Word for Windows) and Brief. The odd thing is that I don't >have Brief. I have an editor called "Boxer," a shareware program that I >picked up on CompuServe. Why do you suppose Windows thinks that Boxer >is Brief? The SETUP routine looks at file names and matches at that level only. It doesn't try to look at the actual file contents. In my case it said I had Quattro on a disk where it wasn't; it had seen the Quicken file and matched the file name (Q). Joe
cburman@abo.fi (05/25/91)
In article <6199@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>, cmdbyk@pmvax.weeg.uiowa.edu (Karl Boyken) writes: > In article <1991May23.203907.17615@sjuphil.uucp>, tmoody@sjuphil.uucp > (T. Moody) writes... >> [Windows Setup finds Brief, only it isn't Brief but an editor called Boxer] > [Windows Setup finds XyWrite, only it isn't XyWrite but VEdit] And: Windows Setup finds Quattro, only it isn't Quattro but QEdit. > Windows must use something inside the .EXE file to identify the app, not just > the file name--which raises the interesting (and possibly incriminating) > question of why Windows thinks a shareware program is Brief. My guess is that the WinConfusion has something to do with the way Setup recognizes the progs it feels are worth setting up. But why does this seem to happen only with editors? > Karl Boyken, Project Analyst | "Distant cousins, there's a limited supply, > State Health Registry of Iowa | and we're down to the dozens, and this is why: > Iowa City, IA | big-eyed beans from Venus--oh my, oh my!" > cmdbyk@pmvax.weeg.uiowa.edu | Captain Beefheart Chris Burman, Senior Failure Internet: cburman@abo.fi Philosophy, Abo Akademi University Earn/Bitnet: cburman@finabo --Nuke Oxbridge.
risto@tuura.UUCP (Risto Lankinen) (05/26/91)
tmoody@sjuphil.uucp (T. Moody) writes: >I recently ran the Windows 3.0 setup routine to locate Windows >applications, and an interesting thing happened. It found Microsoft >Word (*not* Word for Windows) and Brief. The odd thing is that I don't >have Brief. I have an editor called "Boxer," a shareware program that I >picked up on CompuServe. Why do you suppose Windows thinks that Boxer >is Brief? Hi! Your 'Boxer'-editor program must have the same executable file name (B.EXE?) than the 'Brief'. The Setup uses a special ASCII file for initialization, SETUP.INF, which tells it a name to associate to each .EXE found on the disk. So, take a peek to the SETUP.INF, and <S>earch 'B.EXE' (or whatever the file name of the Boxer were) to see what I mean. For .EXE-files not listed in SETUP.INF, the Windows scans their 'Executable File Header' to see, whether they're made for Windows. If positive, their headers include a description of the application, which the Setup uses to list in the 'Install Applications' list box, instead. Btw, you can add your own applications to the SETUP.INF the same way the default ones are. Very handy feature, if you've sold some software to your customers, and later sell them a copy of Windows. Just edit the SETUP.INF to make Windows' Setup automatically add to a group what you sold before. Terveisin: Risto Lankinen -- Risto Lankinen / product specialist *************************************** Nokia Data Systems, Technology Dept * 2 3 * THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK * 2 +1 is PRIME! Now working on 2 -1 * replies: risto@yj.data.nokia.fi ***************************************
bdh@gsbsun.uchicago.edu (Brian D. Howard) (06/04/91)
cmdbyk@pmvax.weeg.uiowa.edu (Karl Boyken) writes: >I've had a similar thing happen with VEdit; Windows think's it's XyWrite. >The answer must be that it _is_ XyWrite, deep in its bowels. VEDIT is not XyWrite in any shape, form, substance, or stretch of the imagination. VEDIT predates XyWrite by a good many years (predates the IBMPC by a good many years, originally available for CRT terminals and other obscure display devices under CP/M ver 1.x on the 8080/z80). -- "Hire the young while they still know everything."
pshuang@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (06/10/91)
In article <7566.283e7b42@abo.fi> cburman@abo.fi writes: > My guess is that the WinConfusion has something to do with the way > Setup recognizes the progs it feels are worth setting up. But why > does this seem to happen only with editors? It is not true that the confusion will occur only with editors. Windows Setup uses a very simple database of filenames to try and guess what applications you have. For example, it assumes that if you have a file called Q.EXE that you have the application Quattro, whose main executable is indeed named Q.EXE. Unfortunately, QEdit also names its executable Q.EXE. This problem occurs oftener with editors than it seems to with other kinds of software because many editors have very short command names, i.e. Q.EXE, B.EXE, etc., more likely to be mixed up. This kind of problem is encountered by any program-finders. I'm not sure that having the program look inside your files to make sure that what it found is what it thinks it found would be very easy. You could not just have it check for file sizes or dates or CRC's because any bug fixes on the application would render your check false. My personal preference is for the database to include not just the filename of the main executable, but to check for auxillary files as well. For example, WP.EXE might be Wordperfect, but then again it might be a number of other word processors on the market. However, if the program-finder programs discovers that the directory containing WP.EXE also contains WP.FIL (a code overlay file), the certainty that it really is a copy of Wordperfect has just shot up orders of magnitude. Singing off, UNIX:/etc/ping instantiated (Ping Huang).