From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Subject: Re: Microsoft bashing (was: Re: Some more misconceptions...)
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:00:17 GMT

In article <24615@oasys.dt.navy.mil> jwhite@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Joseph White) writes:
>
>[discussion on anology of car+parts = os+apps vs car+gasoline=os+apps
>deleted for brevity]
>
>>>That analogy doesn't quite work since an automobile and its parts are
>>>one and the same.  An operating system and application software are not.
>>
>>No both things are "parts" in the sense that an OS+APPS is a customer's
>>solution.  The "Apps" in question wouldn't even EXIST if Microsoft didn't
>
>Actually the anology of car+parts = OS+apps, does not hold.  You are
>missing something, that IMHO is obvious and necessary.  Because you
>didn't/can't see it, you think that it does hold.  The correct anology
>is:  carbody+parts+gasoline = computer+os+apps

It is okay if you use my analogy and extend it.  What you are saying was not
my analogy--MY analogy is valid, and so is yours.  Again, like all arguments,
it is a matter of perspective: If a customer needs to buy a complete 
solution to his problem of transportation he buys a car--if he needs to 
solve computational problems, he buys a computer system.  The parts of the 
car solution is the (for brevity) the engine (aka "parts") and the
chassis (the part everybody, including the IRS, deems as the "car").  The
parts of the computer system is the application (a financial package) and
the environment (hardware and operating system).

When you buy a Ford and 2 years after Toyota announced its milage increasing
add-on for Toyota cars will no longer support American cars... it's unfair 
to expect that Toyota should support your Ford just because you (And other
Ford owners) want them to.  If it makes financial sense for Toyota to support
Fords, then they will... Ford owners ranting and raving about unfair
competition would be silly--if they really want the addon for their cars,
tell FORD to create one--or make the car compatible with the addon.

Likewise, when you buy an an IBM OS/2 2 years after Micorsoft announced 
its application software will no longer support OS/2... it's unfair to
expect that Microsoft should change its mind just because you (and other
OS/2 owners) want them to.  If (when) it makes financial sense for 
Microsoft to support IBM, then they will...  OS/2 owners ranting and
raving about unfair competition is silly--if they really want MS Applications
for their OS/2 operating system, tell IBM to write one--or make the
operating system compatible with the application.

... I think this analogy works just fine. :)

>

>The carbody = the computer, because in and of themselves, they do nothing
>except look pretty.
>
>The engine+transmission(drivetrain),etc = the OS for the computer, since
>each is the part(engine) that makes the respective carbody/computer
>have the ability to do something other than just look pretty.

Users like myself don't believe this... the ENGINE is the thing that
really gets the work done: an OS is useless without the application needed
to solve the problem.  Again, this doesn't invalidate your analogy--just
pointing out that your analogy is a different one than mine.

>
>gasoline=apps, because they are what make's the carbody+parts/computer+os
>USEFUL.

Hmmmm, and how about solar powered cars?  My analogy still holds: the engine
(applications that do the work) are the motor and solar cells... your analogy
doesn't--because the car is "self contained."  Unless you consider that
sunlight is the gasoline--but that's something nobody can control.

In view, your "gasoline" is the electricity that powers the computer system.
It doesn't contribute to whether or not the system is *capable* of doing
the work--just whether or not it is *able* (fine line here) to do the
work.  You can find many sources of power for a car... like you can find
many sources of power for the computer system (generator, batteries, etc.).

I reiterate, I believe your analogy is still valid.  It's just not MY
analogy--which is also valid.

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy