[<<]Message[>>] [<<]Author[>>] [<<]Subject[>>] [<<]Thread[>>]
Number : 921 Date : 2001-11-06 Author : Dan Anderson Subject : Re: Ready for the next step? ripoff? Size(KB) : 9
Hi Random and Kan, Random, thanks for providing more insight with your comments. When I read your first note I was putting myself in Kan's shoes and sensing that the situation would potentially put him in an awkward situation in terms of responding, so thought I might address the issue somewhat head-on first and give him more time/info to determine a response. I think Kan, as well as I, can now more clearly recognize the sincerity and integrity with regard to your intentions, and Kan has indicated his openness in addressing the issue with you. I think the most appropriate thing for me to do is step to step back out of the picture and leave it for the two of you to correspond and develop an arrangement that would be the win-win that Kan was referring to. Best wishes, Dan ========================= ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 10:50 PM Subject: Re: [xxcopy] Ready for the next step? ripoff? > Hi Dan, thank you for your comments, I understand how sensitive the > situation maybe, you make it appear like we as developers will be developing > this GUI for personal or monetary gain. You have got the wrong end of the > stick, I am purely trying to solve problems not create them. > > I'm sorry, but I AM so impatient, with RAD (Rapid App Develop) environments > such as VB or C++ builder myself and collegues could have a finished version > of a proffesional windows GUI for the program in a matter of days. We have > plenty of experience in programming for windows here as it is our trade! > > I was merely asking KANs permission on the situation as it is his property. > Of course I would not "steal" his work so to speak, I just wanted to know > what sort of documentation I must include with the program and if its > development is allowed. > > My developers and network managment staff are not encouraged to use DOS nor > are they used to it - using DOS slows things down and errors occur, some > non-undoable. This has been causing problems consistently for months and I > want to sort it out by providing a clean user interface. > > My question to the members of this newsgroup are do you want the program or > not! I know it would we useful to people who use Xcopy but at the end of the > day we will be creating a windows GUI for it for use internally anyway. If > you feel this is some sort of insult to Kan then spell your conflicting > ways, we simply wish to make his efforts even more usable and this project > may even increase focus on Xcopy by reaching users that are not familiar, or > happy using 1980s MS-DOS!!!! > > rnd > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dan Anderson > To: xxcopy@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 1:06 AM > Subject: Re: [xxcopy] Ready for the next step? ripoff? > > > Rnd, I may be misreading this situation so my apologies if I'm responding > inappropriately. > > Kan is already in the process of developing a GUI interface and distributed > a sample recently. Maybe Kan would seek out the involvement of others such > as yourself, but, regardless of copyright issues, if you proceeded > unilaterally for personal gain (either financial or other spin-off benefits > such as seeking authorship recognition) my initial impression is that it > would potentially be an attempted rip-off situation. > > Kan has been very open in working cooperatively with many people and > developing a user group. Relatively speaking, the GUI interface is > window-dressing whereas XXCOPY is the core concept. When you are provided > with xxcopy, there would be an explicit or implicit understanding that it is > proprietary and would not available for use as a framework for your own > commercial or quasi-commercial developments. There is an element of > authorship related to development of such ancillary programs and it seems > more appropriate to allow Kan to author the GUI interface, with input > offered by others, unless Kan sees value in your developing/authoring > something independently because it involves technology that is beyond Kan's > reach (which I don't think would be the case!). I would hope that you don't > proceed, regardless of copyright issues, if you are infringing on Kan's > initiatives and proprietary interests. > > I have not discussed this with Kan and don't know how he will respond, but > thought I'd throw in my own perception which I expect would be shared by > some others. > > > Regards, > > ...Dan > > ========================= > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 10:13 AM > Subject: [xxcopy] Ready for the next step? > > > > Kan, > > > > I use XXCOPY regularly and it has been brought to my attention many times > > that it would be great if an explorer style Windows GUI for the program > > existed. What issues would arise if myself and another developer actually > > developed a windows GUI for this program. I have listened to comments from > > this newsgroup and other users and have many ideas about implementation > and > > functions of the program, including "ghost" copying ( simulating the > result > > of a copy operation) > > > > Would developing this program break any copyright rules if it were > > distributed ( Obviously I would include XXCOPY ), and what would you > expect > > to be included in the program if it were developed as SHAREWARE or > FREEWARE. > > > > Regards > > > > rnd > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Kan Yabumoto > > To: xxcopy@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 1:52 AM > > Subject: [xxcopy] Win XP and DOS > > > > > > > > >James wrote: > > > >> Why would anybody go to XP? Without dos I > > > >wouldn't consider it. Dos used with xxcopy has saved > > > >my beans more than once. Frankly between all Windows > > > >products and dos I would choose dos first. > > > > And Charles wrote: > > > > > >I was just on an XP machine the other day at a computer store. > > > Much to my surprise I was able to get to the command prompt > > >with no problem. > > > > -------------------------- > > > > Well, "To Windows or not to wondows" is a loaded question. > > This can easily become a religious war, but let add my teke. > > > > Of course, those of us who started our career with > > pre-GUI computers, are appreciative of the virtue of > > command line operations a lot more so than those who > > feels uncomfortable with the DOS Box. That is definitely > > to our advantage. And that is exactly the audience > > XXCOPY is targeting. > > > > I'm not sure if James is a little confused with WinME > > which removed the "DOS layer" when it starts up the system. > > Even WinME has the DOS Box which is pretty much the same > > as all other versions of Windows. > > > > At any rate, to deny the virtue of GUI seems as perilous > > as refusing to use the DOS Box. I remember, before Windows, > > every time I decide to use a new application, I had to > > invest an enormous amount of time with the manual for > > the program and get used to the way the application views > > the problem and learn the philosophy of the programmer who > > wrote the application. And, if you didn't have the > > accompanying manual, the program was nearly useless. > > When every DOS based PC were shipping with tons of thick > > manuals, Apple's ads was boasting their lack of manual. > > Now, how many applications come with a manual 1/2 inch > > thick, or even 1/4 inch thick? I think it's progress > > and the XP is a culmination of all that. The GUI really > > relieves us from learning how to interact with a program > > for common things. Remember, the first thing we needed > > to know when we ran a DOS program was how to exit from > > the program back to the DOS prompt!!! Those days are gone. > > > > I saw an article in NY Times about Chris Jones, the guy > > in Microsoft who was in charge of the XP development, > > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/25/technology/25SOFT.html > > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > But Windows XP's leader concedes he still has a > > fondness for old DOS-style command line. And with > > a few keystrokes, the command line - a visual > > anachronism - appears on Windows XP. "It's still > > the fastest way to do things," Mr. Jones said. > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > It's reassuring that this guy concedes that even with > > the XP, command line methods are still the best. > > > > Although I'm quite skeptical to much of Microsoft's > > claims about the XP, I have little reason to believe > > that the overwhelming majority of industry critics' > > favorable comments are totally wrong. In other words, > > the XP will dominate the world and we have little > > choice. My question is, by ignoring the inevitable > > tide of the XP (and it's successors) which will surely > > replace much of earlier generation Windows, and > > resisting to the change, what would we gain? > > > > To us, Microsoft's bloatware is always a big blessing. > > The more number of files that Microsoft's new Windows > > have, the more important XXCOPY becomes to all users. > > For IT professionals, I still don't see any alternative > > to command line operations. At the same time, GUI can > > help us contain the growing complexity of XXCOPY. > > > > Kan Yabumoto > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > >
This message if part of XXCOPY's message Archive. The archive contains all the messages posted at Yahoo!Groups: XXCOPY.