Author: Don Dailey
Date: 06:02:09 12/04/97
Go up one level in this thread
On December 04, 1997 at 05:43:47, Peter Herttrich wrote: >On December 03, 1997 at 18:42:04, Chris Whittington wrote: > > >> >>For sure, however, Win 95 plug and play gives fewer problems than DOS. >>But stand by for the DOS users complaints when all chess software >>becomes Win95 only. > >Plug and play????? Plug and pray !!!! > >I'm working with (IBM)PCs since 1983, and i had never so much trouble >with installing with this shit WIN95 then the old DOS and WIN3.x. > >Then, from what you are talking? WIN95 is no OS! It's a GUI! >You don't believe it? Ever made the 'mode co80 test'? >If you drive down your WIN95, wait for the 'You can now switch off the >computer'. Now type blind 'mode co80'. Voila, DOS7! Clean and pure. > >This combination of software (DOS7 and the WIN95GUI) is the biggest >pile of software-shit, i've ever seen. >And this makes the trouble with installing and running. > >I will never understand why Mickey-Soft has not build a real 32Bit- >DOS and then a usable GUI. > >Only this way brings a stable OS and usable programs. >Look at the PC-UNIXs, FreeBSD or LINUX, and u get it. > >Chessengines and the GUI therefor could be parted. >Interfaces could be defined (Crafty/Xboard ie.). > >But I'm dreaming. > >only my 2 cents... > >Peter I'm afraid I agree with you here! Windows was designed only for commercial success, makes too many compromises and caters to the lowest common denominator, the new computer user with little or no knowledge of computers. That's not to say it's completely useless, great software has been written for it and strong chess programs will still do well on Windows. We are an extreme minority, most users don't need the power of Unix or linux and just want software that works with minimum hassle and looks pretty. I don't think these low level users would take well to even linux. Windows is fine for non-programmers and playing games and such. There are also lot's of software for windows which doesn't exist, or is not as complete as similar stuff for unix. I agree that windows is more a user interface than anything else. It's no surprise, since what appeals to the eye seems to be what sells. (But actually I find the windows stuff fairly ugly, I still like 3.1 better for looks!) For me it is a horrible OS, a kludge, a bad copy of older and cooler stuff and not a clean break from DOS which is really what was called for here. Don
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.