From: Mike '/m' 

On Sun, 01 Jun 2003 18:34:34 -0500, "Joe Barr"
 wrote:

>
>> The folks that should be worrying are Sun,
>
>Notice how he has shifted the topic?  That's what shit eating maggots like
>Shupak do when they don't have a good answer for the topic at hand.
>
>Supid motherfucking MS employees like Shupak are the reason the whole
>world is dumping their third rate garbage and moving to Linux.
>
>They've had quite enough of the lying sacks of shit from Redmond.


Speaking of lying Microsoft employees, I was looking for some stuff
yesterday, and I ran across a file containing the following:

  /m


==== =================== =================== =====================

#: 118881 S1/Public Image
    25-May-92  12:07:07
Sb: #118460-OS/2 for everyone?
Fm: Mike Miller 72567,3425
To: Brian M Bussio 73750,2656

 > Microsoft also has become very arrogant in the past few years, I think
 > its time for the end-user community to say enough is enough,

Well said.

One of the things that has really irked me about Microsoft is the fact that
their Windows applications group has access to and uses undocumented
Windows APIs.  They say they do this to make their applications better than
anyone elses' applications.

I am not sure that a systems software vendor that gives such preference to
its own applications group has the best interests of the PC industry's open
marketplace in mind.  Such preference inherently places the competition in
a substantially weakened position in the marketplace.


Mike.




#: 119518 S1/Public Image
    26-May-92  10:17:36
Sb: #118881-OS/2 for everyone?
Fm: Brian M Bussio 73750,2656
To: Mike Miller 72567,3425 (X)

Mike,
  Well said.  Brianb.


#: 121263 S15/Open Forum
    28-May-92  19:39:11
Sb: #120989-#Borland-OS/2 or Windows? Fm: Mike Miller 72567,3425
To: Mike Henry 76376,157 (X)


 > To be fair, Doug, it should also be noted that Borland is way overdue for
 > release of the Windows versions of Quattro & Paradox.
 >
 > Why do you suppose they are having such a hard time getting these
 > products out the door?


Maybe because Borland does not have access to the various undocumented APIs
that the Microsoft applications programmers use?



There is 1 Reply.


#: 121536 S15/Open Forum
    29-May-92  01:53:36
Sb: #121263-#Borland-OS/2 or Windows? Fm: Doug Henrich (MSFT) 70632,3546
To: Mike Miller 72567,3425 (X)

Mike,

You know that MS programmers do not have acces to undocumented APIs.  A
reasonable programmer could determine this in minutes.

It has been discussed on this forum several times, and in every case
Microsoft has been positively cleared of NOT using any undocumented APIs.

Please don't incite this kind of fud again - if you were not here for the
several go arounds on this topic, then I apoligize ahead of time.  But I
still wonder where you get your data for this claim?



There are 2 Replies.


#: 121757 S15/Open Forum
    29-May-92  12:47:27
Sb: #121536-Borland-OS/2 or Windows? Fm: Bruce Hallberg[Genelabs] 76376,515
To: Doug Henrich (MSFT) 70632,3546

Doug,

There was a discussion about this in one of the PC Mags recently. Someone
wrote a little program to list all of the API calls and there WERE
DEFINITELY calls that nobody knew about that WERE USED by MS software (ie.
Excel, Word, etc.)

I think the program that pulls this up is somewhere over on ZiffNet. You
should ask over there.

Bruce


#: 121995 S15/Open Forum
    29-May-92  20:02:09
Sb: #121536-Borland-OS/2 or Windows? Fm: Robert Cannon 73577,127
To: Doug Henrich (MSFT) 70632,3546

>>What I don't understand is how OS/2 can possibly run Windows without access
to the core code. And what about Windows drivers?

   Ray Duncan had a series of articles in PC Magazine within the last six
months that indicated that Microsoft applications DID use undocumented
API's. He discovered this by looking at the DLL linkups in WINWORD.EXE and
EXCEL.EXE.


#: 123871 S15/Open Forum
    01-Jun-92  20:14:58
Sb: #Borland-OS/2 or Windows?
Fm: Mike Miller 72567,3425
To: Doug Henrich (MSFT) 70632,3546

 > You know that MS programmers do not have access to undocumented APIs.

I do not _know_ anything with regards to this subject.  I have opinions, though.

 > It has been discussed on this forum several times, and in every case
 > Microsoft has been positively cleared of NOT using any undocumented APIs.

That does not appear to be the case this time.

 > Please don't incite this kind of fud again

Are you really convinced that I am the one spreading FUD?


 > But I still wonder where you get your data for this claim?

As I said up above, I do not know one way or the other, however when I see
evidence such as the following message, I can form an opinion...

=== start of message excerpt =======================================

 Sb: #Win undocumented calls
 Fm: Jerry Parrish/Microsoft 70473,2536
 To: Brian Jongekryg 76327,1433

Brian,

Several weeks ago, we had a discussion about MS apps' use of undocumented
OS APIs.  I stated that MS apps do not use these calls, and you provided a
couple of examples where they do.  I promised to talk to the folks over in
the Apps group about this and get back to you (and anyone else who is
interested).  Here is the story...

I was wrong.  MS apps do use a few undoc'd calls.  The position of the apps
group is that their mission is to create great apps. They will do what it
takes, within limits of legality and good business sense, to do that.  If
that means using undoc'd calls ... they will do that.

I made a concerted effort to point out that even though there is nothing
illegal about MS apps using undoc'd calls, it is probably not a good
business practice because it suggests that our apps receive some sort of
favorable tratement, but I wasn't able to convince them.

==== end of excerpt =============================================


Comments Doug?

Mike.

There is 1 Reply.


#: 124558 S15/Open Forum
    02-Jun-92  19:14:09
Sb: #123871-#Borland-OS/2 or Windows? Fm: Doug Henrich (MSFT) 70632,3546
To: Mike Miller 72567,3425 (X)

Belive what every you guys want to believe.  Anytime an undocumented API is
being used by an applications group within Microsoft, we Systems, scream
foul. We then either document the API or they stop using it.  Many ISVs
find undocumented APIs too.  And they use them.  A large spreadsheet
company has done this, and we have had to change our sstem software to
support it.  So I guess this large spreadsheet company had an unfair
advantage over Microsoft's applications group.

Please go to sleep on this one!

If you want to debate this one go over to a windows forum and ask the
Window ISV gurus.



There are 5 Replies.


#: 126907 S15/Open Forum
    06-Jun-92  08:20:20
Sb: Borland-OS/2 or Windows?
Fm: Mike Miller 72567,3425
To: Doug Henrich (MSFT) 70632,3546


 > Belive what every you guys want to believe. Anytime an undocumented API
 > is being used by an applications group within Microsoft, we Systems,
 > scream foul. We then either document the API or they stop using it.


Specious attempts at spin control notwithstanding, I do not believe
"what I want to believe".  I look at the evidence and form an
opinion.

I have invited Microsoft into my data processing shop as a business
partner. What I "want to believe" is that Microsoft always acts
in a professional, mature and ethical manner; a manner that will help me
meet the long term strategies that I have put in place.  What I see is
evidence of an arrogant, immature company acting in very questionable ways.


 > Please go to sleep on this one!

There's that arrogance I spoke of.  First you tell me that I know that the
Microsoft app group does not use undocumented APIs.  Then, when I quote a
MS employee saying that undocumented APIs are used to make the MS apps
better than all other apps, you tell me to drop the subject.

I have noticed that, in this whole thread, you never unequivocally stated
that the evidence I or others provided was indeed incorrect.


Mike.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4