From: "Antti Kurenniemi" 

"Richard B."  wrote in message
news:aerec2p4gj7427vufvrtgmnef7l7dhin80{at}4ax.com...
>>Dvorak
>
> I always think of his trip to Taiwan to see the Chang modification, I
> suppose that was really a way to get a free trip from ZD so good for
> him.  Well that and his deceit on Compuserve.  To his credit he came
> clean on them all.
>
> So usually I don't read what he has to say.  MS has too much invested
> in Vi$ta at this point, maybe they will hold the fort there as I don't
> see how they can continue down this path.  With all of the os and app
> bloat it  must be a nightmare to manage development.

I think it's just nonsense to call for a fork from w2k. It's both
unrational and unneeded. Even if they did that, people would be crying out
for a complete rewrite of everything "because of that old sucky w2k
codebase". Vista will sell like crazy, and the only thing it needs to
really have ready and working is all the visual gimmicks. All the rest, MS
has years to stitch that together.

And no, I don't like the Vista shit much, I'm just saying that the Dvorak
comment was just plain stupid.


> Heck I've been told the "fix" for a couple of recent apps is to
> disable one of the dual cores.  Amazing.

Well, it's fairly common (in my experience) to use threads in a way that
assumes things, and dual core can do funny tricks to that. A surpriginly
large number of programmers seems to not understand threading very well,
and do all sorts of clever tricks to overcome race conditions and so on,
and these can very easily backfire with dual cores when the threads can
really be executed simultaneosly instead of just sliced inside one core.


Antti Kurenniemi

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5