Subj : Best Package for Windows?
To   : William McBrine
From : Jim Hanoian
Date : Thu Nov 02 2000 06:34 am

-=> William McBrine wrote to SHANNON TALLEY <=-

 ST> reader made for windows (specifically windows/not DOS ported to
 ST> Windows)

 WM> Sorry, this won't answer your question; but I just have to
 WM> comment on the above. I don't object to your request -- only
 WM> your wording. I think you mean GUI vs. console mode. This is a
 
I was going to comment on this, but I see that you have already.
 
 
 WM> When I first released a native Win32 port of MultiMail, it was
 WM> sometimes accused of being "really a DOS program" -- or, as you
 WM> put it, "DOS ported to Windows". Both descriptions are false.
 WM> MultiMail is a Linux program, ported to generic Unix, DOS,
 WM> OS/2, and Windows, in that order. :-)

Many people initially judge the software based on two things...
the "standard" Windows GUI and the mouse.  If those two are not
there, then it obviously isn't a Windows program (they say).

To tell you the truth, I much prefer the keyboard over the mouse.
I'm always using shortcuts in Win95/98 programs and also in the
Macintoshes that I'm forced into using on a daily basis.  Geesh,
things are pretty nuts when I work on an NT network, driving a
Mac G4 all day, and then go home to my Win98 machine.


 WM> BTW, to Jim: I was just looking at the Offline Readers page,
 WM> and I noticed that although you have OS/2 programs divided into
 WM> "PM" and "text", there's no similar division for Windows --
 WM> only 3.1 vs. 9x vs. NT -- even though some of the Windows
 WM> programs listed are console apps. Personally, I'd be inclined
 WM> to combine the 9x and NT categories (are there really any that
 WM> work in one and not the other?), and then split the combined
 WM> group into console and GUI. At least then I might not get as
 WM> many of those "it's really a DOS program" flames. ;-)

Back when the distinction was made, the NT platform was at 3.51,
which you probably know looks and acts more like Windows 3.x.  It
was much more quirky running progams, and I could only presume that
when an author said it ran on Win95 (instead of Win 3.x) that NT wasn't
a good bet unless it was specifically listed as being OK.  Now that NT 4 
has been out for a few years, most things that run on Win95 will run on 
NT, except for some programs that insist on writing to the hardware (such 
as video) directly.  For the most part, these are games.

As you've been saying, the OS/2 modes are clearly separate from the
user viewpoint, and it was the basis for that distinction.  OS/2 
programs generally do specify if they are text mode or PM, right?
I wasn't the one to devise these categories at all.

If I was to make a Win32 text mode category, which other OLMRs 
would fall into it?

Would there have to be a Win 3.x text mode category?


.... Jim Hanoian, Augusta, Maine, USA
.... This is Radio Station WOMB -- the Voice of Labor.
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.37
 * Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

.