From: timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol)
Subject: Windows NT: The Other side of the coin
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 21:57:13 GMT

In article <2b2ddb86@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org> George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org writes:
>> Gee boy, I can't wait to use this super wamperdyne OS on my 
>>computer<G>. What a joke.
>
>MT>You know, George, this is akin to taking a posting asking for
>MT>help out of c.o.o.misc and posting it to .advocacy, then saying
>MT>"look what a lame system OS/2 is!"  I thought even the most
>MT>childish posters stopped doing this quite some time ago.
>
> You NT guys keep telling us how fantastic NT is. You only present
>one side of the coin. That was the flip side. If you can't take it,
>tough.

Thanks, George, for that show of maturity.  If you'd like to turn this
into an NT help group, feel free.  I suspect a lot of people would get
quite upset at that, though.  (By the way, did you forward my comments
to the original poster?  Thought not.)

If you'd like to know about the bad points of NT, I'll gladly tell you.
Also, these are real points, not just someone having a problem with
his machine.  Note that these points all relate to this point in time,
not some number of months from now when the next beta comes along, or
when NT is released.

Bad points about Windows NT (in no particular order):

 1. Few native applications: Currently, there are probably only about
    100 available applications that are written to the Win32 API.

 2. Requires lots of resources: The current beta requires a little over
    50 MB for a full install (including swap file).  It also requires
    8 MB of memory, but it'll be slow.  (Some guy on CompuServe had it
    running in 6 MB, but said that it crawled.)

 3. Mediocre DOS subsystem: The DOS support in the NT beta is not finished
    and it shows.  Also see 5. and 6.

 4. Mediocre Win16 subsystem: The 16-bit Windows support in the NT beta
    is slower than native Windows 3.1.  Also see 5.

 5. Backwards compatibility:  Due to the secure nature of Windows NT, some
    types of applications will not run without rewritten drivers.
    These include:

    a. Applications that directly address hardware, such as FAX cards,
       scanner cards, or terminal emulation cards.
    b. Applications that rely on their own disk drivers; for example,
       applications that increase hard disk capacity.
    c. Applications that directly address disk drives; for example
       disk maintenance applications.
    d. Applications that rely on their own graphics device drivers
       to address the hardware; for example some slide production software.

 6. Stability: The Windows NT October beta crashes once in a while.  In my
    experience, and that of most others, this is almost entirely related
    to the DOS subsystem.

 7. Cost: It is remotely possible that the final release of Windows NT
    will cost $499.99.  I doubt it, though, but a lot of OS/2 advocates
    like to believe that.

 8. Limited installed base: I would guess that there are only 50,000 or
    so people with the NT Beta.  Actually, I'd guess a bit higher, but
    it's not significant.

 9. No new shell: Windows NT comes with Program Manager.  However, the
    capability exists to add other shells such as NDW.  (NDW is planned
    for NT).

10. Limited driver availability: A large number of video cards and other
    types of hardware are not yet supported with the current beta.

So, George, think I can take it?  In the future, when you want to
criticize NT, do it with real issues.

Note that some of these problems also apply to OS/2 2.x (any version).
I welcome other people's input on this list, especially how you see
OS/2 compare in these areas.

     - Mike

P.S. - I apologize for posting information about NT in this group, but
       I'm sure the people that have a problem with it won't mind this
       particular article.

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy