From: "Robert Comer" 

Interesting discussion!

- Bob Comer  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