altman@sbpmt.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) (02/11/91)
In article <1991Feb10.045054.728@micor.OCUnix.On.Ca> baldy@micor.OCUnix.On.Ca (The Bald Eagle) writes: >BTW. Isn't the ms in 'comp.windows.ms' for MicroSoft? Does this mean >that a new group called 'comp.windows.borland' will be created? :) It would seem to me that the ms does stand for Microsoft. However, if we were (not saying that we should) try rename the group to be more precise, it should be comp.windows.msdos or maybe comp.windows.windows as oppposed to comp.windows.x or comp.windows.pm (presentation manager). You see what comes after the comp.windows should be extremely similar to what people refer to the GUI as. X-Windows is known as X. MS Windows is refered to as windows. Presentation Manager is PM. Now if what microsoft is preaching is true, and what a New York Times article in Saturday's paper is true (I'll get to the article in a bit) then we will see Windows on DOS, OS/2, Unix and ... Therefore, the group should be renamed comp.windows.windows I think. Now to the NYT article. According to NYT, Microsoft, Compaq, DEC, and SCO (owned by ms) have joined together and have been working in secret for many months to overthrow IBM, Apple, and SUN as the leaders of the PC and Workstation markets. The Alliance (as its known) are developing a new desktop standard based on a non-IBM version of OS/2 (version 3 ?), 3-D graphics from SGI, and the MIPS R4000 RISC chip. The machine will not be available before summer of 1992, and is not exepected to have any significant impact before 1995. SUN, MIPS, and HP were all approached regarding RISC chips. SCO will be offering Unix on the new machines. Neither Intel nor Motorola will be involved in the manufacturing of the processor chips. That is all from New York. Back to the Gulf. -- - Jeff (jaltman@ccmail.sunysb.edu)