CompuServe Messages

Thanks for straightening me out on couple of my off-handed remarks about Chicago. Yes, I agree it has many of the same features currently in NT and shares the Win32 API. Yet, Chicago does not have the security features of NT which implies that it does not share the same file system. It's hard to imagine why this is so and how it can become anything more than a desk top OS if its true. Yes it may rule the the client but NT will rule many of the high-end desk tops as well as the departmental and data center servers (NTAS). As for running Cairo, I don't know if you were at the last PDC (Professional Developer's Conference) in Anaheim last December but there were machines running Cairo: DeskStation's and a Compaq Pentium. In fact, more than 100 of the 150 or so developers in the Cairo group are runnig on MIPS systems right now. Further, the "tightly coded" Chicago is having the same battle-of-the-bulge as NT. As Daytona will decrease the memory needs of NT from 12MB to 8MB for Intel and from 16MB to 12MB for MIPS, Chicago is currently having trouble running in 8MB. AND, without ready access to "Doublespace" A.K.A. "Stacker" Chicago is going to chew up some hefty drive space as well. The closer these two are in system resource needs the better it bodes for NT . . . IMHO. As far as the "significant development efforts" of Chicago vs. NT the rumor is that Chicago borrows heavily from the former IBM/Microsoft OS/2 3.0 efforts. And, as long as Microsoft must give IBM everything it does on Chicago because of its OS/2 heritage I stand by my prediction that Cairo will spell the end of Windows as we know it.