This message is a very long one, and responds to two recent postings. One
is from Alfredo, the other is from Glenn Cole.  You will find their
postings at the end of my message.

In a nutshell, Alfredo believes Windows 95 runs on top of DOS and Glenn
wonders why I push the HP 3000 on an NT list and why I am not a Mac
aficionado or zealot.

I will answer Glenn first, then carry on to correct Alfredo's mistake
impression.

Glenn, my position on MS Windows is not an enigma.  Let me clarify a number
of things for you.  I have always pushed the HP 3000, and for two reasons.
 Market share has little to do with it.  I truly believe the HP 3000 is a
very superior machine, for what it is designed to do, as I said on my post
in to the NT list, hard-core heads down OLTP.  It is unsurpassed in
performance, reliability and ease of management.  The other reason was I
was always impressed with the management of CSY, especially during the last
7 or 8 years.  Glen Osaka did a great job promoting the HP 3000 within and
without of HP.  IMAGE/SQL was born during his tenure.  I have tremendous
respect for him.  Olivier Helleboid is a good friend from long ago and his
dedication to the HP 3000 was without reproach.  But now, at this juncture
we have Harry Sterling.  I cannot think of a more honest and dedicated man
to lead CSY into the next plateau.  What Harry says he will do, he does.
 He has stated the HP 3000 has a future and it will acquire 64 bitness.
 That is all I want to know.  The HP 3000 is safe.  Hicomp has decided, in
light of this, to further enhance its offering on the HP 3000, helping make
the HP 3000 a viable platform in the multi-platform enterprise. We trust
Harry.

Glenn, I do not believe that Apple has the same dedication towards the Mac.
 I think that Steve Jobs is a flamboyant twerp with lots of ideas, most of
them half-baked.  Those are pretty strong words about a man who has made a
truckload of money and has co-founded Apple.  I think he is in it for the
sheer fun of trying to rescue Apple, but he made sure he was paid up front.
 He is trying to run the company, whilst appearing reluctant to do so.  I
believe he is going to drop the MacOS and start making Windows NT machines
to make money and please Bill Gates and Network Computers to please Larry
Ellison.  Obviously you think I am wrong and so do virtually all other Mac
zealots.

I also believe that Macs are no longer and haven't been for a while,
superior or even equal to Windows 95 PCs and laptops and Windows NT
workstations and servers.  Mac zealots, please save bandwidth.  If you knew
how little I care about your ranting of the subject.  You can stop reading
here, because the rest of the posting is about Windows 95 and Windows NT.


Now for Alfredo.  He states that Windows 95 is built on top of DOS.  He is
wrong.

Windows 95 is not really built on top of DOS.  Windows 3.X was built on 286
architecture and ran on top of DOS.  DOS had full control of the hardware.
 The drivers were all written in 16 bit code and ran under DOS.  Windows
3.x used the DOS kernel and could barely do a form of multitasking known as
cooperative multitasking, just like Macintosh computers still do.  The
enhanced mode of Windows introduced some virtual drivers, but the device
drivers were still under the control of DOS.  This is why you had complex
autoexec.bat and config.sys files.  (Think of the 286 with DOS as MPE V/R
running on classic machines.  Think of Windows 3.x enhanced as MPE V/E
running on 70s.)

Windows 95 is very different form the DOS & Windows 3.x environment.
 Windows 95 was designed for the 386 architecture (32 bit support) and has
its own kernel which supports preemptive multitasking, like MPE.  It also
has a new file system which, whilst still backward compatible, supports 256
character file names.  Under OSR2, aka Win95B, there is another file system
made exclusively for Windows 95.  It is known as FAT32.  There are parts of
the file system which originated under W4WG, such as the VFAT and VCACHE
but these components are 32-bit. (Think of Windows 95 as MPE/XL with still
a good portion of the operating system running in compatibility mode, but
major parts, such as the kernel and the file system running in native mode,
all this on Spectrum class machines.)

A good way to prove to yourself that DOS is not underneath Windows 95 is
the following.  Try placing a reference to a long file name in AUTOEXEC.BAT
or CONFIG.SYS. that is, if you have these files in the first place, which
you really should not have.

Networking was built-in to Windows 95 from the start whereas it was an
add-on under Windows 3.x.  In fact Windows 95 supports an impressive list
of network protocols right out of the box: 7 clients; Banyan DOS/Windows
client, FTP Software NFS client, Microsoft Networks, Novell Netware, Novell
Netware Workstation 3.x, Novell Netware Workstation 4.x SunSoft PC-NFS.
 Windows 95 supports 8 protocols: Banyan VINES Token ring & Ethernet, DEC
Pathworks Token ring & Ethernet, IBM DLC, Novel IPX ODI Protocol, MS
IPS/SPX  (Novell), MS NetBEUI (Microsoft Networks), MS TCP/IP (Internet
 and WAN), SunSoft PC-NFS

If you think that since there are DOS boxes in Windows 95, it is a DOS
machine.  Let me explain to you that those DOS boxes are actually virtual
machines.  They are very much like the Windows 95 emulator that you
described on Mac.  If you want, you can to run in full DOS mode, but you
must reboot the machine and come up in DOS only (rebooted DOS).

However, there is no DOS in Windows NT, that is a completely new operating
system.  (Think of Windows NT as a fully native mode MPE/iX system running
on Spectrum class machines.  Virtually all applications that run on Windows
95 will run on NT, and they run best when they are in native mode.)




The following section covers the last few years in the PC world.

In the last two+ years, I have had  a fair amount of experience on Windows
95 and Windows NT.  I have had time to form a few opinions on this issue
and a few others about the state of the industry, where we have been and
where we are going.  If you have time, read on.  If not, well, I will have
written this stuff in vain.

When Windows 95 was introduced, a lot of pundits and so-called experts said
it was going to be a disaster and to stay away from it. When it did not
crash in the first few months, they said to wait for the next release which
would fix all the problems.  There were few problems, and a service pack
was released about six months later.

In retrospect, Windows 95 was a huge success and a monumental task.  Sure,
you can find people who had all sorts of problems with it, but that is
anecdotal evidence.  Whilst the problems were real enough for the folks who
encountered them, in the grand scheme of things, they (the problems, not
the folks who had them) were background noise.

Two years later, upwards of 50 million copies have been sold.  I can't even
hazard a guess as to how many copies are really out there, but it may
approach the 100 million.  Lots of people bought a single copy and upgraded
many computers with that one copy.  Before you ask, I have a license for
each of the PCs in our office, and at home.)

I say that it was a monumental task, because Windows 95 had to run on an
incredible number of combinations and permutations of PCs hardware and
software.  Just look at the number components it supports; video cards, LAN
cards, disk drives, disk controllers, tape drives, sound cards, SCSI
adapters, modem, keyboards, mice, trackballs, joysticks, processors,
motherboards, memory combinations, CD-ROMs, scanners, printers, plotters,
global positioning devices, and infra-red connectors.  Look at the number
of companies building PCs, and the various models they have produced over
the years and are now producing.  Windows 95 runs on and with virtually all
the hardware produced in the last 8+years.  I installed Windows 95 on a
386/20 PC which had a plate on it saying it was made in 1988.  It ran
slowly, but then so did everything else on that box.

Now, there were a lot of people who complained about Windows 95.  I even
remember someone on this list two years ago who said he had installed
Windows 95, then had taken it off, because he did not need it.  He also
said his customers did not need it.  Talk about shortsightedness!  A lot of
companies at first, resisted Windows 95, because of various reasons.

These reasons ranged from perceived instability to predicted support
problems.  In actual fact, I have found Windows 95 much easier to support
and much more stable than Windows 3.x.  For many companies, it was an issue
of hardware.  It is true that Windows 95 consumes more memory than Windows
3.x.  Remember that a large portion of Windows 95 is 32 bit and also that
Windows 95, thanks to its preemptive multitasking, can have a lot more
applications opened at one time.  Also, Windows 95 handles memory a LOT
better that Windows 3.x and can really take advantage of larger memory
sizes.  I recommend 32 MB as the sweet spot for Windows 95.  At the
introduction of Windows 95, memory was still fairly expensive.  I remember
paying $700 for two 16MB boards.  For companies, multiply that by the
number of computers, and it adds up.  A month ago, I paid $239 for a 32MB
DIMM for my laptop, bringing it to 64MB.

Another component is software.  In order to fully utilize the capabilities
of Windows 95, you must run 32-bit code applications.  A lot of people said
that Office 95 did not bring much new technology to the Office family.
 Externally they were somewhat correct, but they forget that Office 95 is
all 32-bit code.  You can watch the preemptive multitasking in action when
spreadsheets are recalculated while you work and the spell checker runs as
you write the document.  In fact a lot of the problems people had and still
have with Windows 95 is due to 16-bit software, be it application or
drivers.  But all this 32 bit software consumes a lot more memory that the
16 bit code.  So the need for memory grows.

As an aside, I remember supporting HP 3000/70 with 8 to 12 MBs of memory.
 You can't even boot a 9xx with under 48MB.  These suckers run best with
LOTS of memory.

For the next year, it was fun to listen to all the naysayers (some were on
this list), moan and groan about Windows 95, and trying to compare Windows
95 to MPE/iX.  What a joke!  MPE/iX can't do anywhere near what Win95 can
do.  But then again, it is not meant to do anything like what Windows 95
does. It was a riot to listen to, and take part in the ongoing discussion.
 But more needed to be done.  There was a dearth of information out in the
users community.

So, I added a section at the Hicomp webpage talking about the various
issues people where bringing up and how I had dealt with them.  Summer 1996
saw me put together a presentation on Windows 95 for HP World in Anaheim.
 One of the questions I asked was, "How many people here work for companies
which have a policy prohibiting the use of Windows 95?"  There were about
20-30 people in a room of 250 professionals.  Since that time, I have given
the talk several times, updating it constantly.  The question is always
asked and early in 1997, no hands were raised.  Well except once in
Baltimore, where there was one company with that policy, still.

Earlier this year, I added a companion talk on Windows NT.  There are
several companies which have elected to jump to Windows NT.  That is a very
sensible decision, if you can afford it.  Not everyone can make that jump.
 The cost is prohibitive for many companies.  Consider that Windows NT runs
only on 486 or newer computers, does not support anywhere near the array of
hardware Windows 95 does, and requires a lot of memory.  (I recommend 64 MB
as a good size for Windows NT Workstation and 128 for NT Server to start
with.)  Windows NT does bring increased stability, security and performance
from Windows 95.

In late 1996, a new version of Windows 95 was quietly released.  It is
referred to as OSR2.  This version brings in FAT32 and support for new
hardware.  Since the introduction of OSR2 most, if not all OEMs, have
switched to it.  Since January of this year, virtually all PCs sold have
had Windows 95B (OSR2) installed.  One feature, so to speak, of Windows
95B, is that you cannot multiboot. You have OSR2 and nothing else.  Also,
Windows 3.1 does not ship on any PCs anymore.  If you have a choice, it is
between Windows NT 4.0 Workstation and Windows 95B.  I have played with a
lot of PCs and laptops this past year, and they work so well, they are so
smooth it is a joy to behold.  Most PCs come with 16MB, which should
immediately be upgraded to 32MB.  A lot of times, the new PCs come bundled
with software, such as the Microsoft Office 95 or 97 Suite, which makes for
an overall smooth, stable system.  The preemptive multitasking of Windows
95 is really brought out by Office 95 or 97 and all the new 32 bit
software, no matter where it comes from.  The state of the art in PCs as
really moved in the last few years.

Nowhere is this more apparent than with laptops.  These little marvels of
engineering are just phenomenal.  With Windows 95 OSR2, a laptop is really
great.  The plug and play inherent in the laptops works very well, and a
lot of people, such as myself have acquired or are planning to acquire
laptops which they will use instead of desktops.  With a current crop
laptop, a docking station and a nice monitor, you are cooking, and you can
take it with you.  The PC-cards (now 32-bit buscards, don't buy a laptop
that does not have buscards,) enable you to connect anything to a laptop,
from SCSI devices to Ethernet card and now USB cards.  You can connect the
latest offering in peripherals.  Many high-end laptops have some sort of
multi-function bay or adapter.  For instance my laptop has a bay where I
can have a floppy drive, a CD-ROM drive, a second hard-drive or a second
battery.  The vendor has plans for adding other devices, perhaps DVD and
other things.  The final reason I selected the one I have (the clincher if
you will,) is that it was rated as the fastest laptop running Windows NT.

If you went by our booth at HP World, you would have seen my laptop
connected to a big monitor and also to a DAT autoloader via a SCSI card.
 It was running Windows NT 4.0 Server. Beautifully.

Windows 98 brings in support for still more hardware, and new technology
such as USB and FireWire.  I have one PC running Windows 98.  I try to stay
ahead so that I can test our software on it, ahead of everyone.  I also
share all my findings with everyone who will listen.  I mean, it's nice to
poke fun at Microsoft and Bill Gates and all that, but one needs to get on
with work and solve the problems.  So when people say, don't use Windows,
get a Mac instead, why should people listen and take a giant leap
backwards.  Sorry Mac zealots, but Windows 95/98 and NT have left you
behind.   You can now get a multiple CPU Pentium II machine running Windows
NT at much higher performance levels than Macs.  Have you seen the high-end
workstations from companies like Compaq and HP? If you want still more
power, jump to Alpha running at 500 MHz and more.  I played with one last
month in Germany.  Nice box.  I could not help but wonder what it would be
like to run Windows NT on PA-RISC.  The final retrenchments of Mac, the
graphic artists, are moving to high-end Windows NT to get undreamed of
performance.  Maybe Requiem, the next Mac OS will try to even the score,
but at that time it will be competing with Windows 98 and NT 5.0.


Here is an anecdote for you.  A few weeks ago, I flew from Houston to San
Francisco to be on the technology close-up broadcast.  The trip is close to
4 hours.  I was seated in first class (very frequent flyers do have some
privileges) and besides me this man pulled out his laptop as soon as we
reached 10,000 feet.  It was a very new, very high-end IBM Stinkpad, the
760.  He opened it up and booted it.  As I always like to see what people
use, I glanced over and was astonished to see the man was booting up
Windows 3.11.  He barely contained my laugh, and I asked him how he liked
his unit.  He told me he thought it was nice, but that he was encountering
out of memory problems fairly frequently.  He also complained that whilst
he had been told the battery should last 3-4 hours, it would usually
discharge within an hour.  I almost had an accident in my seat trying to
contain my laughter.  I kept enough self-control to ask him why he had 2
PC-cards in the PC while he was on an airplane.  What's a PC-card he
answered knowingly.  I pointed the PCMCIA slots to him.  He said that he
plugged the network into one of them at the office and he plugged the other
one to the telephone.  I explained to him that PC cards consume power when
they are in the machine and that he could stretch the battery significantly
if he pulled them out while travelling.  Then I had to ask him why he had
Windows 3.11 on the system.  I knew that the IBM Stinkpad 760 comes with
Windows 95 preloaded.  He said that the company he works for does not
support Windows 95.  The IS department issues PCs and laptops to everyone,
but not before they format the disk and install Windows 3.11 on them.  I
explained to him that Windows 95 on the IBM Stinkpad has excellent power
management modules created by IBM to further enhance the ones from
Microsoft.  They also have internal modems which Windows 95 drive very
well.  He again stated it was company policy.  I told him that his IS
department were incompetents and should be queried as to why they afflict
such a nice laptop as the 760 with that old OS.  He did not say anything.

About a half hour before we landed, he shut down his system and informed me
that I was right.  Removing the PC cards had enabled him to work for 3
hours without any problems.  He was very happy and that when he got back to
the office, he was going to raise a stink about these issues with the
management and the IS staff.  He had seen my laptop with Windows 95, and he
was angry he was being forced to use Windows 3.11 with the old Office
suite.  This just points out how supposed professionals have adverse
effects on unsuspecting users.  There are far too many people in the
industry, who do not keep up with the technology.



I would like to share with you a number of observations about Windows 95
and NT.  If you are still reading at this time, you are probably a Windows
user and whilst you know everything about MPE, Windows has grown to be a
fairly important part of your life, be it Windows NT or Windows 95.  The
industry moves very quickly and machines which are state of the art now,
are classics in a few months.  You can guard against early obsolescence.

I have divided this section into 2 parts, hardware and software.

Hardware.

Many companies have fleets of PC where no two are alike.  This is bad
practice.  It is a good idea to formulate standards for desktop, server and
notebook PCs.  This way you can increase the support to your users.  You
may need to have low-end  and high-end desktops and laptops.

Pick a type of network card and use that type exclusively.

Make sure your video card is PCI.  Windows 98 allows you to have multiple
monitors, but only if the video cards are PCI.

Same thing with other components you may add to the PC like RAM and modems.

Business PCs usually do not have sound cards.  Decide on a policy, because
users are going to come asking.  On one hand, they can create a racket, on
the other, there is more and more business multimedia software and the
Internet is replete with sound.  Also, continuous speech voice recognition
is here.  It needs sound cards.

Look for bus mastering expansion cards such as Network cards and graphics
cards.

Select components from manufacturer which have a good support web site.  If
you can't find drivers, documentation and FAQs for devices they made a few
years ago, it does not bode well for the longevity of the support for
devices you are buying now.

While you are at it, make sure you have the latest drivers for all your
components.  Many people still run Windows 95 PCs with the original
drivers.  Newer drivers have better performance and are more stable.

Do not skimp on RAM.  I suggest 32MB for Windows 95 desktop, 64MB for
Windows NT desktop and 128MB to start for Windows NT servers.

If you have 486s, dump them.  They can no longer keep up with the software
and they are not plug and play.  Get Pentium with PCI bus for proper plug
and play.  Also with 486s you cannot take advantage of the true speed of
Windows 95/NT.  If you can't dump the 486s, make sure they have the most
recent BIOS possible.

If you are shopping for a new desktop, make sure it has the 440LX chipset.
 This supports AGP.  Windows 98 will make use of it.  Look for USB
connectors.  USB peripherals are staring to appear, in a few months, it
should be a flood.

There is a wide choice in CPUs.  For Windows 95, consider the Pentium MMX
and the AMD and the Cyrix offerings.  If it is a budget debate about more
RAM versus faster CPUs, get the RAM.  For NT, get Pentium II.  You may
consider multiple Pentium II for high-end graphics workstations and for
servers.

Look for all-SCSI machines especially for servers.  You will be pleased
with the overall performance.  You will probably have to build a desktop if
you want all SCSI.  See My Dream Machine further down.

Get the best monitor you can afford and then some.  Get a 17 inch or
bigger.  Do not touch the monitor, it will get smeared and will interfere
with your vision.  Make sure you have a video card which will show your
screen to good advantage look for 4MB of video memory, more is better.
 This way you can run the big monitor at high resolution and have more
screen real estate to keep more applications opened and running.  Windows
95 and NT handle multiple applications very well.  Monitors are durable and
can be used from one PC to the next.


For laptops.

Do not even consider a new laptop if it does not have CardBus PC-card.  It
will be obsolete too fast.

233MHz vs 166MHz.  The price premium for 233 is very steep.  The
performance gain is 10% at best.  The 233 does run cooler that the 166 and
uses less battery power.

Do not even consider a new laptop if it does not have removable disk
drives.  Disk sizes are expanding very rapidly and you can stretch the life
of the laptop with bigger disks.

Check the memory limit.  Look for something like 64 MB or beyond.

Get active matrix screen 12.1 inch or bigger.  Never touch the screen with
anything but the softest of cloth.  Slap people who would point to
something on the screen.  Take great care of the screen, replacement cost
is over $1,000.

Look for docking stations capability.  A high-end laptop with a docking
station, a good monitor and an external keyboard and mouse can make good
desktop replacement.  This way you only have one machine for everything.


Software:

Consider running Windows 95 on laptops for the plug and play (removing and
adding PC-cards on the fly) and for power management.  Windows NT runs at
full power and the PC cards must be in before the system comes up.  You
cannot add them or delete them later.  (These statements are for most
laptops.  There are several laptops which have OEM extensions to Windows NT
for power management and PC-card support.  Also, many laptops have BIOS
which allows some measure of power management.)

Consider running Windows NT on desktops, for better security and overall
better performance.  Consider Windows 95/98 for the desktop if you have
older hardware and older applications which may not run on Windows NT.
 Windows 95 is not picky about the hardware, NT is very picky.  Also
drivers for some devices are not available on Windows NT.  A last thought,
Windows NT is more expensive than 95 both in license and in RAM.

Never install Windows 95 from floppies.

If you install Windows 95 from scratch or as an upgrade from 3.11, you may
want to add the cabinet files onto the system.  They take 30MB of disk, but
it simplifies the support to have the cab files available on the system.
 If you have everything networked, you may want to put the cab files on the
server somewhere where they are easily accessible.

Do not take the default installation.  Decide on what is needed and
standardize.  Do install solitaire.  It is a good way for technophobes to
learn how to use a mouse.

Do not install everything you find on the web.  This is the surest way to
have an unstable system.  Resist the temptation.  Ask yourself if you
really need this piece of software.  Installing and removing applications
impacts the system.  Most problems with unstable systems are traced to
application or utility software.  Also a lot of software do not remove
themselves completely and tend to leave traces behind like DLL and registry
entries.

Remove all 16-bit application software, if at all possible.  32-bit
software takes advantage of the preemptive multitasking of Windows 95 and
is long file name aware on 95 and NT.

Backups:
Prepare for the worst.  Take good backups. I use a 4mm DAT drive for our
little network.  Hicomp has evolved a methodology to preserve and quickly
restore a Windows NT environment in case of the loss of the disk drive or
corruption of the Windows NT directory.

Make sure you have recovery diskettes for all your systems.

Create magic diskettes to boot your systems.  These diskettes will boot
your PC in DOS with real mode drivers for the CD-ROM.  I travel with two
sets, one for NT, the other for Windows 95.


My Dream Machine.

This is the final section.  Here I will describe what I would put in a PC.
 The components I mention are some that I use or have tested, or about
which I have read favorable reviews.  A year and a half ago, I built the
server we have in the office.  I selected the components and verified them
against the hardware compatibility list for Windows NT.  This server is
nowhere near as sophisticated as the offerings from IBM, Compaq, HP and
others, but I learned a lot.  Most importantly though, the server is
dependable.  It runs and runs and runs.  It is fully SCSI based and has 2
disk drives, an IBM and an HP, a Plextor CD-ROM, a Sony CD-R and an HP
SureStore Autoloader DAT.  It has an Adaptec 2940 SCSI card to drive all
this stuff.  The motherboard is an ASUS product and the 64 MB memory is
Kingston.  The CPU is an Intel Pentium and I added 256Kb of L2 cache for a
total of 512Kb..  The video card is a Diamond 3000 with 4MB and the sound
card is a Creative Labs Soundblaster.  The modem is USR.  The Network card
is a Kingston product and whilst I am not very pleased with it, it works
fine.  It ain't broke, so I don't fix it.

The system runs Window NT Server 4.0 and has never crashed.  Well except
for that time I pulled the SCSI cable connected to the Autoloader.

Now, if I were to build a PC, it would have the following components:

I would start with an ASUS motherboard with 440LX chipset.  There are a few
models. Either with a single (P2L97-S) of twin (P2L97-DS) Pentium II CPU.
 I would put in a 266MHz Pentium II.  The 300s are difficult to find.  64MB
of Kingston RAM, two 32MB DIMMs.  Adaptec now has a RAID controller card,
the AAA-130.  I would use that with a pair of Seagate Barracuda 9LP (9GB)
or IBM Ultrastar 2XP (9GB) disk drives.  I would use the integrated Adaptec
SCSI in the motherboard to drive the Plextor CD-R and the HP Sure Store
DAT.  The video card would be one of either a Diamond Fire GL 1000 or a
Matrox Millenium II.  If I could find an Elsa Gloria card, I might consider
that one.  The network card would be a 3Com 10/100 bus master network card.
 The modem would still be a USR.  I bet you the lights will dim in the
neighborhood when I turn on that bad boy!





Kind regards,

Denys. . .

Denys Beauchemin
HICOMP America, Inc.
(800) 323-8863  (281) 288-7438         Fax: (281) 355-6879
[log in to unmask]                             www.hicomp.com



-----Original Message-----
From:   F. Alfredo Rego [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Thursday, November 06, 1997 6:12 PM
To:     [log in to unmask]
Cc:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        RE: Announcing Qedit for Windows

Denys <[log in to unmask]>  wrote:

>As for having the primitive DOS prompt, please be careful.

Careful?  Who?  :-)

I used "primitive" in the sense that my dictionary states for mathematics:
"A form in geometry or algebra from which another form is derived."

In fact, Windows 95 is built on top of DOS... So, DOS *is* THE "primitive"
in more ways than one :-)


Long live DOS, Denys...







Then Glen Cole posted the following:

Item Subject: Nomination for Adager MemoCube Denys posted to an NT list:
>     The 3000 is the most stable platform anywhere for heads-down,
>     hard-core OLTP.  It's also the easiest to administer.

This is exactly why Denys' position on MS Windows is such an enigma for me.
On the one hand, he praises the 3000 (considered "dead" by the general
populus for the longest time, and a machine whose market share, as I
recall, is substantially less than that for the AS/400) for its ease of
use.
Thus, favouring a machine with relatively small market share but "better"
technology-especially ease of use-is not a problem.
He has stated before, though, that Apple's *attitude* was enough reason to
look elsewhere. And certainly I can understand that.  Heck, when the
cheapest colour Mac was $6,000, you can bet I looked elsewhere as well!
Times have changed, Denys. And while the Mac is longer competing with the
 DOS prompt (which was the case in 1984), I believe you will find much to
like about the platform-and about the company as well.

If you look today, you'll find another platform emerging, one that may
surprise you. Who would have thunk that Apple would bet the farm on a
*Unix* server?! Yes, I know you're not keen on Unix, but please do not
condemn it on that alone.
Those who have used OpenStep have praised it deeply. The single biggest
gotcha, though, has been its price. With the increased volume afforded by
Apple, the new Rhapsody OS-based heavily on OpenStep and positioned as a
server to compete directly with NT-promises to have a much greater impact.
(Be sure to check out the developer environment, including Interface
Builder.)
One of the major features of Rhapsody is that it runs directly on Intel
hardware. And Mac hardware. The applications so written are targeted at
something called the "Yellow Box." This is part of Rhapsody, so the apps
run on the previously-mentioned bare hardware.  And on Yellow Box for
Windows (95 and NT). (There was mention of a Yellow Box for Mac OS, but not
of late. Perhaps because Rhapsody for PowerPC includes a "Blue Box" as
well, to run Mac OS apps, they may have decided against this.)

If you look on Monday afternoon, you'll see all of the above, plus... ?
(Hint: think "Oracle." And maybe deals with Lucent, IBM, and/or Sun.)