Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu alt.fan.bill-gates:967 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:7771 comp.os.ms-windows.misc:10811
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bill-gates,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!microsoft!hexnut!davidst
From: davidst@microsoft.com (David Steckler)
Subject: Re: RE: re: Challenge to Microsoft supporters.
Message-ID: <1993May17.025120.25092@microsoft.com>
Date: 17 May 93 02:51:20 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
References: <twalls.02vo@ncc1701d.demon.co.uk> <C716uq.II3@feenix.metronet.com> <1993May16.135022.27516@gps.leeds.ac.uk>
Lines: 43

In article <1993May16.135022.27516@gps.leeds.ac.uk> csympc@scs.leeds.ac.uk (M P Conmy) writes:
>In article <C716uq.II3@feenix.metronet.com> jack@feenix.metronet.com (Jack Hudler) writes:
>>In article <twalls.02vo@ncc1701d.demon.co.uk> twalls@ncc1701d.demon.co.uk (Tim Walls) writes:
>>>
>>>But I don't want to have to run blasted Windows every time I want to delete
>>>a tree - it is absolutely ludicrous to load a hog like that just to delete
>>>some files!  It would be like requiring a crane to change the tyre on a car.
>>
>>Then why don't you download som of the public domain utilitys the do exactly
>>what you want an shut up.
>
>Why should he have to?  This sort of thing should be included.  How about
>the millions of people who don't have access to pd libraries over networks?
>
>Just because people can work around it, doesn't mean that something shouldn't
>be done to remedy the situation.
>

These are perfectly valid points and I agree. I'm glad we (MS) are starting
to remedy this situation with DOS 6 (and it will get better in future 
releases). You do need to be aware of some history, however. In the 
mid-late 80's, MS's point of view was that OS/2 was going to take over
the world and DOS would be phased out. As such, resources for DOS
(and windows, for that matter) development were mostly redirected to OS/2.
The theory was to keep just enough resources on DOS to support people
until they started using OS/2, so utilities and such for DOS fell by the 
wayside.

Then Windows 3.0 hit the market, OS/2 flopped (1.x, at least...2.x seems to
be doing a little better, but its future is still cloudy), and people either
stayed with their DOS (3.x and 4.x) apps or moved to Windows. About that
point in time, MS made its decision to drop OS/2 for DOS/Windows in the
short term and Windows/NT in the long term. DOS 5, much improved over DOS
3.x and 4.x, was the first result of MS's refocussing on DOS and Windows.
Version 6 takes things somewhat further and I suspect future versions will
offer even more in terms of "real" OS features (I work on NT and have no
real clue about what my coworkers over in DOSland are doing, but I do
know that there are a heck of a lot more of them than there were a
few years ago).

	...Dave

Of course these are my opinions. If you want MS's opinions, as a PR person.
