Author: Brian Thomas
Date: 15:53:20 08/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
>Legacy like DOS is abandonned, and to keep running DOS applications the best >choice might be to run them under Linux in the near future. > >Actually I have prepared myself to MS abandonning Win32 and I am now running >Windows under Linux for the more and more seldom cases when I need to run >Windows software. VM applications seem to be getting a larger marketshare than ever. MS just acquired Connectix (sp?) and is including a lot of that functionality in future Windows Server 2003. To what extent, I do not know. But it shows that (for good or for bad!) that indeed, if you want to run older apps, you need a VM to do so. > >I was comparing PalmOS and WindowsCE (=PocketPC) actually. The history of the PC >version of Windows is in my opinion a strong indication of the business >practices of the maker of this software and these practices are likely to be >reproduced in the history of WindowsCE. > >I have been surprised to learn that many softwares designed for PocketPC 2002 >simply did not work anymore under PocketPC 2003, but I guess I shouldn't have >been surprised. > >To be really fair it is true that a class of utilities called "hacks" under >PalmOS are now incompatible with newer versions of PalmOS. However Palm had >warned a long time ago about these incompatibilities and has provided new APIs >in order to let developpers rewrite these utilities in a more compatible way. > >It is true that legacy has to be abandonned sometimes, but everything is in the >way you do it. I agree; Palm is ideal for this. Although, interestingly, I just received an email from Chessbase that fixes Pocket Fritz 2 on the Mobile2003 OS. The only fix was in the engine dll. I'm very curious, for perosnal reasons, what was broken -- was it a loophole now closed in the latest version? Who knows. That's my biggest complaint with the OS, I've had several apps not work on 2003. A little more proactivity on MS's part would've been nice. >I was sincere and I wanted to know if there was something I was not aware of >concerning PocketPC. My apologies, for whatever reason I read sarcasm in the statement... >Basically you are saying that you prefer PocketPC because of some developpement >tools produced by MS and the possibility that they will work better with other >MS software running on PC (or that they simply do not exist in their exact "MS >compatible" form on PalmOS). > >That's a developper experience, not a user's experience. > >The user's experience so far is that PalmOS software is much more compatible >with Word and Excel and other Office modules than PocketPC is, which I find >amusing. That is funny if true, I can't confirm nor deny this, I haven't used the Palm enough... -Brian
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.