From: 5692330@mcimail.com  (Robert Gammon)
Subject: Re: DOS 6 Beta Looks for OS/2!!!!!!!!
Nntp-Software: PC/TCP NNTP
Organization: Texas Instruments Materials and Controls Group
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 23:34:35 GMT

In article <1993Jan03.000549.23048@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:

 >> In article <1993Jan2.024108.2313@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> z_kupkams@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
 >> >In article <1993Jan02.025323.15888@microsoft.com>, philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
 >> >> In article <1993Jan1.133731.2312@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> z_kupkams@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
 >> >>>
 >> >>>     All this talk about FUD & Misinformation about OS/2 from Microsoft has
 >> >>>some NEW Merit!
 >> >>>
 >> >>>     I Recently talked to a Beta Tester of DOS 6.0. He Runs OS/2 with 2 Hard
 >> >>>Drives, One FAT, One HPFS. He decided to Install the DOS 6.0 Beta on the FAT
 >> >>>Partition, and got a Message saying, and I paraphrase: 
 >> >>>
 >> >>>- OS/2 Detected! Due to the size of OS/2 you may wish to delete your OS/2 
 >> >>>files before installing DOS 6.0 -
 >> >> 
 >> >>      Interesting.  What is the problem with that?  If there was a
 >> >> similar message that said "Autocad detected.  Due to the size of
 >> >> Autocad you may wish to delete your Autocad files before installing
 >> >> DOS 6.0", whould that be bad too?
 >> >> 
 >> >       The Problem is simple. There is no need for such a message. If there
 >> >was insufficient disk space, a simple "Insufficient Disk Space" would be
 >> >enough. Unless of course you wanted to to spread FUD 
 >> 
 >>     Point A:  We have no idea what the actual message is.  I'll wager
 >> that it _isn't_ what was quote above (in fact, you admit that it's
 >> "paraphrased" _and_ secondhand.).  There are several good reasons why
 >> you wouldn't want to run the DOS 6 Beta (and note, it is a beta) and
 >> OS/2 on the same machine.
 >> 
 >> 
 >> >F-Fear- Fear that Using OS/2 and DOS on the same machine would be dangerous.
 >> 
 >>     It is.  DOS 6 may make your FAT partitions unreadable by
 >> OS/2 or other operating systems.
 >> 
 >> 
 >> >Uncertainty - Make the User uncertain about using DOS and OS/2 at the same
 >> >time.
 >> 
 >>    As well they should be.  It is a beta product, after all.
 >> 
 >> 
 >> >Doubt - Make the User Doubt OS/2, after all OS/2 didn't even say that there
 >> >might be a problem, but DOS is so great that it warns a user of 
 >> >impending danger.
 >> 
 >>     This is a bit ludicrous, don't you think?
 >> 
 >> 
 >> >>>So The next time I hear a Micro$oftie say "IT's IBM spreading FUD not us"  The
 >> >>>DOS 6.0 Beta will immediately come to mind! It's Simply BULLS**T!!!!
 >> >> 
 >> >>      Why?  The DOS 6 beta work with OS/2 installed, doesn't it?
 >> >
 >> > 
 >> >       Yes Why???? Why even have such a message at all????
 >> >       ANSWER: FUD
 >> 
 >>     Answer:  There are possible incompatibilities between DOS 6
 >> and OS/2.  This is not FUD - it's a simple fact.
 >> 
 >> 
 >> >>>This is intollerable! All of the Posts claiming "Why punish someone for being
 >> >>>successful?", have no ground in light of this blatent attempt to halt advancement
 >> >>>of technology!!
 >> >> 
 >> >>     Please explain why a warning message is a "blatent [sic] attempt
 >> >> to halt advancement of technology".
 >> >> 
 >> >       OS/2 is technologically more advanced than DOS/Windoze. So Try to
 >> >Scare the User ( read FUD above again ) until MS has something as good as OS/2,
 >> >then say "Oh, you don't want that old DOG 6.0a ( 'a' version fixed numerous
 >> >bugs that caused competitors apps not to run, oops. sorry Lotus & Borland )
 >> 
 >>      Interesting theory.  Here's a real question for you:  Can
 >> the truth also be FUD?
 >> 
 >> 
 >> >>>Microsoft is doing what it does best, Trying (Lying) to Users of products of a
 >> >>>competitor!
 >> >> 
 >> >>     What is the lie?
 >> >
 >> >       Get a clue Phil. The above message is an obvious LIE! There was plenty
 >> >of room on the drive where the Beta was being installed. OS/2 wasn't on  it!
 >> >That is the LIE!
 >> 
 >>     Let's assume that the message was exactly as it was quoted.  In
 >> this case, the message didn't say that you had insufficient disk
 >> space and it didn't tell you to remove OS/2.  It said that OS/2
 >> takes a lot of disk space - this is true.
 >>     Does anyone have the _real_ message?  I suspect that it says
 >> nothing like what's written above.
 >> 
 >>                                 -Phil
 >> 

Hmm, Since Phil's address is "MICROSOFT", sounds to me like HE has the BEST
access of any of us to the EXACT wording of the message.  Granted, this DOS 6
development project is not in his department, but I find it difficult to 
believe that Microsoft is SO LARGE, and SO DISPERSED that with a few phone
calls he couldn't find the answer within a few hours or a day or two (allowing
for business trips, meetings, and vacations by various Microsoft employees).

--
Regards,
Robert Gammon
(713)-274-3299       (voice)
(713)-274-2324       (fax)