From: walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some premises
Date: 4 Sep 92 21:44:56 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:

Actually I should have worded these things somewhat more carefully...
As it is, I was just asking to be flamed...


>In article <Bu2BLJ.EL3@news.cso.uiuc.edu> walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) writes:
>>Premise
>>#1:	Windows is difficult to use (for a GUI).

>And "Blue" is an ugly color.  This is NOT a "statement" (as you allude to
>further down) it is an opinion.  *I* do not find Windows difficult to use,
>even for a GUI.  I found SunView difficult to use... and many X-based
>Window managers difficult to use (These, too, are opinions).

Now these are my opinions:

I find most users fall into 3 catagories:

Beginners:  Anyone who has tried to show a beginner how to use windows knows
that it can be a living hell (like a beginner not being able to find a
program they just save (where did it go?), or unistalling a program, or...).
 
Mid-level:  Tend to be the most religous.  Tends to stick to only one
platform.  Has learned enough about a system to be able to work around 
most shortcomings.

Expert:  Sees a computer as a tool.  Tends to use many computers w/ many
OS's and uses the best programs/computers/OS's for the job.  Has been around
long enough to lose the religous aspect.  

Now of these 3 groups, you have the beginners who can use windows if someone
sets it up for them and does administration work, the mid-level who find
something they can work with and don't want to change, and the experts
who don't care about the OS as it does the job.

So windows will make the biggest impact on the beginner.  And compared to
all the other GUI's it's just not as easy for a beginner to use.

>>
>>#2:	Windows programs are easy to use.

>Same as above.  I've seen some very difficult Windows programs to use.
>Another opinion.

Another statement (for God-sakes I just wanted to start a discussion of
pros and cons, not start a flame war).

A better phrasing is:  most people believe windows programs are easier
to use, true or false?


>>
>>#3:	Windows could be in trouble if another OS comes out that runs all
>>windows programs, uses the same amount of system resource, has about the
>>same performance for about the same price, and adds other features to boot
>>(note: OS/2 doesn't meet this critiria).

>Doesn't match up to reality.  MS-DOS, for example, is not in trouble because
>DR-DOS came out.  Again, this appears to be another opinion of yours.

Yes but MSDOS is an old OS, and most people stay with what they have
because they don't need to upgrade.  Windows still hasn't the market share
to keep all challengers away (and I'm not talking about just IBM).

>>
>>#4:	NT will not be a success unless it can run more than the top 100
>>Dos and windows programs.

>When IBM/MS-DOS came out, the most popular computer was the Apple //e... and the
>IBM couldn't run any Apple programs (certainly not even the top 100).  Yet,
>the DOS was a huge success.  Again, this appears to be YAO (yet another opinion)
Bad example because people had to buy new computer systems.
A better one is when OS/2 ver. 1 came out with the terrible DOS support.



I'm sorry I got you so riled up, but as I stated before, I did a terrible
job at trying to start up a pros-cons style of argument.

					Todd Walk
					walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu