See comments below, marked >>>>
Thanks - Lori Brownell
> Personal and Business Systems - Microsoft Corp.
>From: firstname.lastname@example.org [SMTP:email@example.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 1997 11:52 AM
>To: Murray Sargent
>Subject: Re: FW: MS-Windows and Unicode Support
>Murray Sargent wrote:
>> The Apple language packs seem to be pretty cool, but unfortunately their
>> OSs don't support Unicode very well. This has been a problem for us.
>> Is it a problem for you?
>Well, Apple's Unicode story is you can use Unicode with QuickDraw GX
>APIs, unfortuntely, not many people using QuickDraw GX API, even
>internally in Apple.
>Microsoft claim they have Unicode support on Win32 API, unfortunately it
>do it badly on Windows 95:
>>>>>Windows 95 has limited support for Unicode. The support that they do
>>>>>include does allow an ISV to write a Unicode encoded application that
>>>>>will run on Windows 95, although the functionality will be less than what
>>>>>is available on Windows NT, because the app must convert the data back
>>>>>and forth from Unicode to the appropriate Windows character sets, thus
>>>>>limiting your multilanguage processing abilities to those languages
>>>>>covered by existing Windows character sets.
>> unfortunately their OSs don't support Unicode very well.
>Is there any OS SUPPORT UNICODE VERY WELL ???? I don't think so.
>( Maybe Xerox Star station, Taligent, or NextStep support Unicode very
>well, I don't know. I only know UNIX/PC/MAC, neither one of these tree
>could be count as an OS support Unicode VERY WELL. I am not asking
>anyone to support Unicode better here. I just want to state the
>>>>>Yes, there is an OS that supports Unicode very well. That OS is Windows
>>>>>NT. You can not combine Windows 95 and Windows NT into one OS. They
>>>>>share a common, non-Unicode, API set to ensure application compatability
>>>>>for existing Windows applications, but they are 2 different operating
>Don't tell me how good the Unicode support in Window NT or 95. Look at
>the list below:
>1). If you call SendMessagesW and some other xxxW APIs on Windows 95,
>you can compile, you can link , you can run, but it won't do anything
>for you. It may return you some error code but it won't do the right job
>which you expect an API usually will do. So you cannot write an Unicode
>Win32 application which work both on NT and 95. I won't count Windows 95
>is a OS which support Unicode VERY WELL.
>>>>>Windows 95 is a different OS from Windows NT. You can certainly write a
>>>>>100% Unicode application on Windows NT and call only W APIs and it will
>>>>>work. You can also make that Unicode app run on Windows 95, but it does
>>>>>require some additional work to do the code page conversions correctly.
>2). Although some of the Unicode text drawing APIs is working on Windows
>95, they are buggy and limited. For example, you can call TextOutW() on
>Windows95 but not DrawTextW() or DrawTextExW(). And if you call
>TextOutW() with a CJK fonts with underline, it won't draw underline
>correctly. It is not a font problem but an implemenation problme. I
>won't count Windows 95 is a OS which support Unicode VERY WELL.
>>>>>The problem you mention with TextOutW has been fixed for the next release
>>>>>of Windows. Although, no new W APIs have been added for the next Windows
>3). You cannot use Unicode with BUTTON/LISTBOX/COMBOBOX/EDIT control on
>Windows 95, simply because the problem stated in 1). I won't count
>Windows 95 is a OS which support Unicode VERY WELL.
>4). Even the native OS do some stupid job on Windows 95. For example, if
>you create a font on Chinese/Korean Windows 95 with charset =
>ANSI_CHARSET and want to draw European characters, it sometime work
>sometime don't, depend on the context. Which prevent drawing European
>characters (or even simply Copyright sign) on Chinese/Korean Windows
>through TextOutA() API. Look at
>http://home.netscape.com/people/ftang/europtype.html for details
>I think what the origional email asking is Language Packs. But not
>With Apple's language kit, I can easily put CJK text into Menu, Button,
>Checkbox, Radiobox, TextEdit, List, by specifing fonts to those control.
>On Windows 95, even with that SO-CALLED Language Pack. you cannot do the
>same thing without overloading the display function of those control. An
>Japanese application could easily run on the US MacOS with Japanese
>Langauge Kit without rewrite. There are no Japanese application could
>run on US Windows 95 with those so-called langauge pack without rewrite.
> >>>> The original mail was asking about Language Packs and not Unicode
>support, so I will now address that question. The Windows NT 4.0 and
>Internet Explorer 3 language packs allow for displaying content in the
>languages of the installed language packs. It is absolutely true that input
>capabilities and running of localized apps is not 100% supported with these
>language packs. That will change in the upcoming Windows NT release.
>Windows NT 5.0 will be a major advancement in this area by extending the
>multilanguage support to include input and running of localized applications,
>as well as some UI enhancements. If you want to know more about this new
>multilanguage support, come see the NT talks in Mainz.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:33 EDT