Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!uhccux!uhunix1.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu!pilger
From: pilger@uhunix1.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Eric Pilger)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: QEMM386/Windows config question
Message-ID: <9140@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
Date: 29 Aug 90 19:27:22 GMT
References: <18950003@hpfinote.HP.COM> <331@news.nd.edu> <1990Aug13.171459.13839@mccc.uucp> <9131@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> <1990Aug29.114402.7527@watserv1.waterloo.edu>
Sender: news@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu
Organization: University of Hawaii
Lines: 30

In article <1990Aug29.114402.7527@watserv1.waterloo.edu> tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>
>In fact, much of the software (soon to be a vast majority) that breaks the
>640K barrier will ONLY run under Windows 3.0 (these are known as "Windows
>applications").

But this is the same old song and dance we have been hearing for
years.  The facts are that only a few Windows Applications currently
take advantage of this feature.  To become "a vast majority", Windows
3.0 must be clearly superior, and it is not.  It does not provide
tools for making the most of EXISTING APPLICATIONS.  Countless others
have already learned that you ignore this at your own peril.
Microsoft still seems to be learning the lesson.

>Get a clue, Eric.  You're bitching at Microsoft because Windows 3.0 doesn't
>work well with QEMM/386 without understanding *WHY* Microsoft uses DPMI
>instead of VCPI.

I understand Microsoft uses DPMI because it meets its own agenda.
What I'm bitching at is that I have to pay the price for this agenda
that contains many things of absolutely no importance to me.
Microsoft is welcome to go its own way.  However, I need to use DOS,
and the extensive powers it already provides.  I can't wait for the
still unfulfilled promise of OS/2, and sadly, the currently
unfulfilled promise of Windows 3.0.

Windows is also primarily an operating environment for

                              Eric Pilger
					NASA Infrared Telescope Facility