Re: the ms monopoly is over. gonna kick some ms ***. are you with me?

First off let me state that I honestly haven't laughed this hard in a LONG time. My cat actually got pissed at me because I scared her I laughed so hard.

Now lets start taking some of the various points one by one


1. "It is an operating system only from a point of view focused on the api".
1A. This isn't an operating system. At best it is an application framework. From the sounds of it, it isn't even that. If your documentation sucks, how can anyone develop against it? By guessing?

2. "it didn't even modify the registry."
2A. This makes me so I won't even consider running it. You obviously have no understanding of Windows if you think you can install and remove a service and not update the registry. Also you will find this automated install/uninstall is going to be a bit hampered when LUA hits hard.

3. "the monopoly is over because..."
3A. Yeah, I don't think so. If this were the case, MS would already be dead as there are several frameworks out there doing what you are saying you will do some day.

5. "and the implicit view that there is not room for multiple visions for software technology"
5A. Do you have any clue the amount of work MS is putting into cross platform integration? I mean any clue at all? Have you looked at any of the stuff for example in Windows Server 2003 R2?


Other points from other responses

> my reluctance to converse is partly a reluctance to promote my business
> here, i.e. to spam this group.

You already started, why get shy now?


> if anything ruined my "character reputation" on the net.

You have no reputation at this point to ruin.


> if only 2 people per week purchased my "book", i would be able to
> work full time on adding the content, and the book will become technically
> interesting pretty quickly.

So you are asking people to buy into something you haven't really truly built yet for the honor of paying to watch you try to build it? Did the attempt at getting Venture Capital through normal means fall through? Venture capitalists are the ones who fund dreams, users and admins which is what you find here pay for functioning products.


> if no one purchases it, i will still be able to work about
> 1/3 time on it, with a relative productivity of 1/6

I suggest you go this route until you have something to show that people will buy just because they think it is good. People aren't going to pay for it because they feel bad or simply want to help you. As for your productivity and efficiency, that isn't something you tend to relate to customers to invoke them to pull out their wallets. "I would be more productive if you payed me" doesn't tend to sway people.


> i am stunned, and cannot comprehend, why no one is interested in my project

I am stunned and cannot comprehend how you can be stunned and cannot comprehend this. How many software developers have you sent money to that really have nothing for you? More specifically, how much money have you donated to my software which is actually out there in massive used by tens of thousands of companies (donate button at the bottom of http://www.joeware.net/pers/index.htm) admins.


> the price is $4 plus $1 per month; those terms will rise as content is added.

Usually it is free to get nothing. I like your honesty up front though that you will be charged more as you actually have something.


> if you're going to eventually sign up, it will be better for both of us
> if you sign up now. would you rather pay $4 for a 50/50 bet now or $64
> for a sure thing in two months?

You think the odds are high as 50/50 and will ever be a sure thing?



In a nutshell let me give you some free advice. You might or might not have something here. I tend to doubt you do simply from reading your technical responses. I don't see you successful trying to charge people for you to build your great idea. I more see you delivering a great idea and then charging people. The subscription model is a bad model for you. A lot of people are all into the pay a little every month, but they do actually expect to have some value in it. Until you have that value you have nothing people will subscribe to. If your product is so good, you will be best served putting it out there for free for developers with documentation they can actually use and don't have to pay for so they start developing other "killer" apps off of it such that there is content for people to want to spend the money to get your service so they can use those apps.

MS doesn't have a monopoly in the true sense of the word in that there are no other choices period. It is simply that the majority of good quality software that the majority of the public trusts runs on Microsoft. People choose Microsoft because that is the platform that has the programs they want to run. Other folks choose MAC or Linux or BSD for the same reasons.

The answer from me is no, I do not intend to support your desire to not have a day job and give you money for something that offers me no value from any point of view I have been able to muster. If whatever it is you create is so amazing that it just goes crazy I will be happy to pay the $64 when it is a sure thing.



joe


--
Joe Richards Microsoft MVP Windows Server Directory Services
Author of O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition
www.joeware.net


---O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition now available---

http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm



Wo'O wrote:
i hesitate to converse, but your questions are valid, i appreciate the
interest, and no one is flaming me. here are some brief responses:

1. IP-DOS (tm) is only a plain vanilla Windows service. It is,
technically, only a Windows app. It is an operating system only from a
point of view focused on the api, i.e. only from an application
programmer's pov.

2. it didn't replace any drivers. it didn't do anything to your
computer. it didn't even modify the registry. it automatically
uninstalls itself on reboot to minimize customer support issues; i want
to be absolutely sure that installation and removal works perfectly
before changing that. it is only a disclosure of information, a "show
and tell", so automatic uninstall makes sense to me

3. the monopoly is over because ten more developers, all more clever
than me, can do what i did. they can defeat microsoft in winning
designs for new applications, i.e. they can convince Joe Coder to write
his app for their api rather than for win32 and its derivatives (e.g.
MFC). applications written to these piggyback api's will be portable
to the extent that the piggyback's api is available on multiple base
os's. for example, IP-DOS (tm) was written with portability in mind.
the base o.s. will become a commodity; base o.s. suppliers will not
enjoy any monopoly power in getting application developers to target
their api

4. gui's improve with age, and this one is just a baby. it is adequate
for its present purpose, which is to allow me to present system
information such as memory pool usage, thread activity, deadlock loops.
my development focus, now that i have a useable presentation
subsystem, is to develop technical content for it that will begin to
make the download interesting to technical people

5. i do not hate Microsoft. i just hate its monopoly, and the implicit
view that there is not room for multiple visions for software
technology. i have a radically, diametrically opposed view from that
of Mr. Gates and the other visionaries at MS. i want to live to see a
software marketplace where there are 4, 10, or even 20 competing
visions for the future of software.

6. wrapping your mind around the "piggyback o.s." concept requires (1)
a Gestalt shift in perception, and (2) identification with the
application programmers' p.o.v. for a group as technically
sophisticated as i think this one is, the idea that IP-DOS (tm) is an
o.s. will always seem absurd. thirty years ago, at UCLA, my
programming professor told me that i had to decide whether i wanted to
be a "system programmer" or an "application programmer". i decided
then, and have always seen myself as, the latter. MS didn't provide me
with a programming abstraction, with an api, that i liked. so i wrote
my own

i do have a policy of not conversing on the net, so please excuse me
for departing. thank you for your interest and for your courtesy

.