From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: nt, an assessment
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:39:49 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Jul22.2712.2779@dosgate> "bill dehaan" <bill.dehaan@canrem.com> writes:

>Largely irrelevant to YOU, perhaps. Not to others. Posix and security
>requirements make using OS/2 very difficult for government contract bids;
>NT meets (and exceeds) these requirements.

I wonder, though.  I was under the impression that the DoD only
certifies hardware/software combinations.  NT can't be certified by
itself, but only in bundles with certain specific computer models.
And each combination would need to be certified independantly.

Still, MS may team up with a hardware vendor or two to certify a few
government-class machines.  I wonder if they can legally do this...

>SD>There will be a major OS/2 2.0 CSD in September, and a
>
>Our IBM rep has said this, yes.

Really?  So it will be in September?  I only heard "Fall".

>SD>multi-processor version in November.
>
>But not this. Where did you hear this?

This is pure rumor. I don't know where it got started either.

>Mass marketing doesn't mean just Fortune magazine.

Well, there've been two-page ads in every issue of Network World for
about a month and a half now.  I've seen Workset/2 advertised in Dr.
Dobb's Journal for about two months now.  I don't get other computer
mags, so I can't say for sure.  I've yet to see a television ad, but
I'm not qualified there - I've only seen one MS ad on TV, and there
were heaps...

>I sincerely hope so. There are some real problems that need to be addressed:
>SVGA driver support, tape support, backup problems, WPS instability, performance

Why is everyone placing SVGA support as an IBM responsibility.  IBM
has repeatedly stated that they will only provide direct support for
IBM hardware, with respect to drivers.  Other drivers must be gotten
from the hardware manufacturers.  Just like with Windows 3.0.  This
will become a non-issue when vendors get drivers for their products,
just like it eventually became one for Windows.

Tape support is similar.  IBM supports their own drives.  Other drive
manufacturers will (eventually) get drivers for their own drives.

The other things are bugs, not design flaws.  They will be fixed RSN.

>Well, certainly not for OS/2. I think WinWord could definately snag a good
>percentage of OS/2 word processing (and not the current WinWord for OS/2),
>but WordPerfect will probably get the foot up ahead of time. Getting that
>foot in the door is all important, as we all know.

Yep.  I can think of heaps of WinWord 1.1 users who really wanted an
OS/2 version of 2.0.  Instead, I have to install and run the Windows
version in the WIN-OS2 session.  It works fine there, but I'd much
rather have a native OS/2 version, so I don't need the slow clipboard-
exchange facility to share data with my Excel 3.0 for OS/2
spreadsheet.  (I will not upgrade Excel to 4.0 unless and OS/2 version
is released, BTW.  I may very well switch to 1-2-3 or Wingz first...)

>SD>That is why Lotus, WordPerfect, Borland, etc. will be very aggresive
>SD>in the OS/2 2.0 market. They see a level playing field.
>
>They are also playing in ALL of the fields, but I tend to agree anyway.

MS's applications division shoudl be playing ALL of the fields too.
-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "I don't even represent myself
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
 ((|,)
  ~|~  Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.