From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:28:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: mksol.1992Aug19.192827.441
Distribution: na
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <1992Aug18.203053.13759@nosc.mil> discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:

>In article <1992Aug18.173411.16366@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>
>>They'ave also done much TO the PC industry.  Let us also give BLAME
>>where it is due.

>True.  I blame them for several things (which I shan't get into here).  But
>as a company, it is their right to choose the distribution medium they
>want... just as it is your right to choose to buy it or not.  I don't
>feel it's valid to criticize Microsoft for using CD's to distribute their
>SDK--anymore than I blame one of my suppliers for distributing software
>only on high density floppies.  It's THEIR choice--I can switch companies
>or buy a compatible drive--that's my choice.

That's right, and it's my choice to say, "Hey, Microsoft, remember the
CUSTOMERS?" and their choice to say, "To hell with the customers.  If
they don't want to buy a CD-ROM, screw 'em."  And my choice to point
out what a poor attitude that is for a software SELLER.

>>
>>The point is, a lot of us have no pressing need for ANYTHING a Cd-ROM
>>will do for us.  It is, in that sense, totally useless.  Unless, of
>>course, one of the more arrogant software houses elects to only
>>distribute on CD-ROM.  Then, of course, why everyone MUST just buy
>>one.  No thanks.  Yeah, they're handy for some things, but the
>>marginal utility is just too low for me (and, I suspect, a lot of
>>others) to think it's reasonable to be 'forced' into buying one.
>>

>There is no pressing need for 1.44mb floppies either (200K of extra data
>storage for how much more money per disk??)  But the merits of the floppy
>spoke for itself--until you are hardpressed to find any new computer that
>DOESN'T have one.

Quite right.  And have you seen anyone distribute software ONLY on
1.44 MB floppies to 'drive the market'?  Hell, even IBM, who was
pushing the things, offers OS/2 on both sizes.  An OPTION for CD-ROM
makes sense; demanding it does not.  Microsoft has basically told the
developers of the world that if they don't buy a CD-ROM like
MIcorosoft wants that they can just go pound sand.  Fine, but it's a
corporate attitude that they have always been noted for and which I
find more and more in evidence of late, as the company start feeling
pressured by the unexpected success of OS/2 2.0 and pressure on another
cash cow of the company, MS-DOS, from the folks at Digital Research.

>Most companies sell software in a variety of formats.  Sierra, for example,
>distributes software in anything from 360K to 1.44mb to CD-ROM.  I buy
>the CD-ROM, of course, since the storage requirements aren't as great as
>floppies (I wish I had a nickel for every floppy that went bad on me because
>I forgot to close a box in my garage).

Exactly right.  A VARIETY of formats.  To reach a variety of users.
As in not saying that if you don't have a CD-ROM, we're not interested
in anything you might develop and we don't give a damn about your
ability to load this Alpha software.

>If I were distributing betas of an operating system, I'd choose CD too.
>It's far cheaper to mail a CD than it is to mail two boxes of floppy disks.
>It's far cheaper to mail a CD than it is to download an operating system
>at 14400 baud.

Oh, I would choose it PREFERENTIALLY, too.  I would also, however,
recognize that the world does NOT all own CD-ROM drives and make
provisions for that.  But not Microsoft.  THEY will write the rules
for the market, and you'd better by God march to their music.

>Again, nobody is "forcing" you to buy it.  If you don't want it, don't buy
>it.  Same goes for everything else in life: cable TV, air conditioning,
>luxury automobiles...

They are 'forcing' anyone who wants or feels they might need an early
look at Windows/NT to buy a CD-ROM.  This, of course, makes perfect
sense from their point of view, since they've learned over the years
that they can kick the customers around all they want.  We'll make
more. 

>>>Whether or not the media is CD-ROM, 3.5" floppies, 5.25" floppies, or
>>>cassette tapes--you will always have to "pay money to someone else" to
>>>use it (if it's commercial software).
>>
>>That's not the point.  The point is that I cannot use it AT ALL except
>>for things I buy.  I can't, in other words, store MY stuff on it.

>But that doesn't stop you from buying audio CD's, does it?  If you wan't
>to store your own stuff, buy a hard disk.  One shouldn't complain that a
>tool is useless because it only does what the tool is designed for--and 
>not what YOU want it for.  I'm not upset that my wirestripper doesn't
>unscrew screws--I just buy a screwdriver.

Would you be upset if the major nail manufacturer set things up so
that you couldn't drive their new nails unless you had a wire
stripper, even though you never do anything else that requires one? 

>>
>>>True.  For a very expensive drive.  600mb of storage for $200 is not
>>>"very expensive."  A Net optical drive costs around $2500 for 300mb and
>>>*then* $250 for each 300mb media.  CD-ROM costs less than $5 per disk
>>>(depending on the software).  Heck, you can get the ENTIRE simtel library
>>>for only $20!
>>
>>But it's READ-ONLY storage.  You're comparing it pricewise to
>>soemthing I CAN WRITE TO.  Not being able to write to it makes it
>>pretty useless to me as storage.

>No, I'm trying to show that, for DISTRIBUTION PURPOSES, it is far CHEAPER
>to use CD-ROMs.  Yes, you'll argue, "it's cheaper for the distributor, not
>for the user"--but (optimally) what is cheaper for the developer will
>eventually work it's way down to the user.  The same machine that is used
>to crank out Led Zepplin CD's, can be used to crank out Software X--so
>with the backing of two industries (music and computers) CD-ROM can
>potentially be the cheapest, and most distributable medium available.

Once again, great for the distributors and people who already have
CD-ROM drives.  What about MOST of the customers, though?  One is left
feeling like the attitude is "We are MicroBorg.  You WILL be
assimiliated.  Resistance is futile."

>>
>>Tape makes more sense to me.  I can use the tape for other things
>>(like backups and giving copies of my stuff to other people).  I can't
>>do that with the CD-ROM.
>>

>Consider what it takes to dupe a tape compared to what it takes to stamp
>out a CD.  Consider what it takes to MAIL 3 150megabyte tapes compared to
>what it costs to mail one CD.  Consider that a 150 megabyte tape drive
>COSTS the same as a 600mb CD-drive (and the CD-drive can be used to
>listen to music too :).  Consider that stuff stored on CD will generally
>last longer than tape because of magenetic decay and susceptibility to
>dirt...

Yes, yes, yes.  No one is arguing that from the POINT OF VIEW OF THE
DISTRIBUTOR CD-ROM is the neatest thing since sliced bread.  However,
last time I checked, THEY were supposed to be selling to US as
CUSTOMERS.  That would say to me that they should at least care a
little bit about not 'driving the market' to make everyone go out and
buy a CD-ROM drive that they don't need for anything else except
loading a frigging ALPHA.

>>>When 32bit mega apps start appearing, would you rather install them from
>>>20 floppies (ala OS/2 2.0) or from a single 'Rom?
>>
>>Well, given that I don't own a CD-ROM and don't plan on having one for
>>the foreseeable future, I prefer the 20 floppies.  At least I can read
>>those. 

>Ahhhhh.  The crux!  So said the fox when he couldn't reach the grapes...
>"they're probably sour anyway..."

This has been the point all along.  It took you this long to get it?
The point is that forcing people who do not have or need CD-ROM drives
to buy them in order to load this ALPHA software strikes me as pretty
arrogant on the part of a company towards CUSTOMERS.

>>>Doug, as a supplement to your good, fast drive... CD-ROM is pretty good.
>>>It (as I said before) will never replace hard disk technology--but as 
>>>a distribution medium it's one of the best there is.
>>
>>One of the best there is FOR THE DISTRIBUTOR and IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE
>>SOME OTHER NEED FOR THE CD-ROM DRIVE.  Except for things that are
>>INTENDED to be used from the CD itself and not 'installed' on the hard
>>drive, from the USER point of view requiring a CD is the WORST
>>distribution medium.

>honestly: the first CD-ROM drive I bought doubled as the only audio CD
>player in the house.  Since then, I found that the thing was so useful I
>bought two more drives ($150 each)--and a player for my stereo (the drive
>was much more useful for software than for sounds).

Well, this is all very wonderful for you and all that, but so what?
What, pray tell, do you find so incredibly useful about a CD-ROM
drive?  You do touch on one thing here, though.  In order to even come
close to being truly useful for books, etc., you have to have SEVERAL
of them.  Otherwise you get the joy of unloading one book so you can
load another one, when all you wanted to do is take a quick look in the
second one before you continued with the first one.  Personally, for
that sort of thing, paper makes more sense.


-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy