[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: consider the facts of the Stac case..

From: Erik Funkenbusch
Subject: Re: consider the facts of the Stac case..
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 14:32:59 -0600
User-agent: 40tude_Dialog/

On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 19:43:09 +0000 (UTC), Vincent Fritters wrote:

> On 2009-03-03, Hadron <> wrote:
>> Vincent Fritters <Vince@nowhere.invalid> writes:
>> Wrong. Presentation manager was indeed in OS/2 2.x And Warp.
>>> 2.x had the workplace shell, although technically it was built on PM.
>> It had the WPS but this does not mean the PM was not used.
> You're splitting hairs. WPS was built from PM code, so technically
> both were "included" however the default shell in 2.x was WPS not PM like
> it was in 1.x.

Uhh.. no.

WPS was a shell.  It was not built from PM Code.

Do you understand the difference between a shell and Windowing system?

PM was the primitives.  The windows, icons, pointers, etc..

This is comparable to Explorer versus User, or KDE vs X or Gnome vs X.

> The point is Microsoft played dirty with IBM, Stac, Digital Research and
> many others and they continue to behave the same way with Novell.
> IBM was able to sustain the damage. Others were not as lucky.

IBM was just as much to blame over the fallout as Microsoft was.  There
have been several books written about this.

BTW, you do know that Stac also lost a lawsuit against MS too, right?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]