Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 13:09:07 08/06/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 05, 2003 at 18:53:20, Brian Thomas wrote:
>
>
>>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.
MS has acquired this company and its technology in order to offer the ability to
run older versions of Windows NT on their new servers with thin clients
connected to it.
They have got a lot of complains because older applications that had been
designed for Windows NT could not run anymore on newer versions of... NT (even
of they are called Windows Server 2003 or Windows XP).
The solution they have found is to run older versions of NT inside a virtual
machine.
</sarcasm on>
NT originally meant "New Technology".
I say "meant" because I guess they have had to find
some other words for the N and the T.
:)
</sarcasm off>
A word about Windows running under Linux: while it is true that it can be done
with a Virtual Machine (a complete emulation of a virtual PC by a physical PC -
quite inefficient) the solution I am currently using is different.
It's Win4lin. From a synthetic point of view it is a set of Windows drivers that
allow a standard copy of Windows to access all of the hardware thru the standard
Linux APIs.
Windows is not using a virtual processor. It is executing the applications at
native speed (naturally it only works on x86-compatible processors). When it
needs to access the file system or display something it calls the corresponding
drivers. These drivers are not the standard Windows versions. They are versions
that are just redirecting the calls to Linux.
So it's Windows using the processor directly to execute applications, but using
Linux to access the hardware.
Windows and Linux work together hand-in-hand on the same computer. Windows can
run full screen (a key allows to switch from the Linux desktop to the Windows
desktop) or in a window on the Linux desktop.
>>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...
I have ported my Chess Tiger engine to PalmOS and I'm now considering porting it
to PocketPC. I try to gather as much information as possible in order to decide
if it is now the right time for me to release a PocketPC version of Chess Tiger.
>>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...
Almost all reviewers of handheld devices have come to the same conclusion.
Working with Word and Excel files is easier under PalmOS. Formatting transfers
better with PalmOS applications than with PocketWord and PocketExcel running on
PocketPC, for example...
Christophe
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.