From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Bundling Networks, OS/2 v. NT
Date: 11 Oct 92 19:08:50 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Oct10.225425.29765@microsoft.com>, petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Sk
elly) writes:
>In article <1992Oct10.063949.16171@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.ed
u wrote:
>
>>
>> >What I was hoping you'd do was to give me a real answer as to why
>> >you don't want to have it around.  Does it take up space?  Does
>> >it cost to much.  Does it give you hives.  Does it make your os of
>> >choice look bad.
>>
>> Umm, I did give an answer:  it may not be one you like...
>> Like I said, it costs too much when you don't need networking.
>> One could buy OS/2 2.0 for $195 or NT for "under $500".  Tell me
>> what advantages NT has when one does not need networking/multi-user/
>> security.
>
>Your answer, NT may be to expensive with networking.  Well, the only
>price we have for NT now is $69.  I don't see that as very expensive.

That is useless and you damn well know it.  The discussion was about the
*real* price of NT, not the pre-release.  The vast majority of people will
never know about this price.  Supposedly it will be irrelevant in a few days
anyway.
>
>As for the under $500 number, well, I would say that
>"under $500" means "we don't want to set a price yet", and
>not "$499.95".  I suspect what the marketing guys are going to
>do is look at the prospective market for NT, and set the price at
>what the market will pay.  If the market is not willing to pay
>$500, then the price won't be $500.  If the demand/price curve
>tops out at $149.95, then that's what it may sell at.  Or it may
>top out at $250.  However, because you yourself were complaining
>that the $500 number is too much, I would take yourself as a data point
>on the demand/price curve and estimate that the price may be less.
>
That isn't how things will work.  Remember that NT was origionally slated to
sell for over $600.  People muttered that they wouldn't pay that.  Thus they
made the statement "Under $500".  In america that means $499.95.  Considering
all that has gone into it, MS would have a very hard time recouping any costs
if it was priced similar to OS/2 or Windows.  NT will not sell like Windows or
even close.  It will have to be more expensive and should be considering what
is in it.

>
>
>>
>> >> I already have OS/2 2.0 .  But if I didn't, all I have to do
>> >> is to call 1-(800)-3IBMOS2 and pay $149 (or $99 as an upgrade
>> >> from DOS, or $79 as an upgrade from Windows), but I would have
>> >> to do it before October 31 when this OS/2 sales promotion ends.
>> >> Or I can wait until next year to buy NT for "under $500" to
>> >> get features I don't need.  (blatant OS/2 advertising intended :)
>> >
>> >I'd put the same for another OS, but since there is a definite predjudice
>> >against people with microsoft in their email address, I'll refrain.  No
>> >use generating even more flame traffic.
>>
>> I have noticed that some people strongly criticize Microsoft (the
>> company), but I have not seen ``a definite prejudice against people
>> with Microsoft in their e-mail address''.  I have seen some OS/2 fans
>> criticize people who happen to have MS in their e-mail address, but
>> this does not prove your assertion.  Try changing your header to
>> petesk@not_microsoft.com and see what happens.
>
>I seem to remember a thread about limiting MS employees abilities
>to post things about MS products and other products on the net.
>This was not about employees of companies in general, but about
>MS employees.

No, I recall that it was about companies in general.  MS just happened to be
the company that it was focused primarily at.  It doesn't seem to have stopped
you though does it?
>
>>
>> But you are wise not to promote NT prices on an OS/2 newsgroup.
>> You can, of course, issue an RFD, wait a month, issue a CFV,
>> wait for 3-4 weeks, issue a tally, and have your NT advocacy n/g.
>> That way you and Brian can give out all the NT tidbits and prices.
>> PS (from MS) and BS (with an MS in CS) advocating NT (an OS from MS)
>>
>> Then again, go ahead, promote NT prices here.  I'll do it for you:
>>    Attention everyone:  Why buy OS/2 now for less than $195 when
>>    you can buy NT next year for "under $500".  Don't hurry, don't
>>    act now.
>
>Oh, sorry about the discussion of pricing above.

Right.

>>
>> >
>> >petesk@microsoft.com
>> >My Opinions...
>>
>> mlevis@not_microsoft.com
>> My Scorpions...
>>
>> P.S.  Seriously, I would be willing to take a look at a special
>>       version of NT for my machine if MS would unbundle stuff
>>       like networking/security etc and reduce the normal price
>>       of this special version to "under $200".  Otherwise, by not
>>       using these bundled features, NT will roughly be like an
>>       overpriced OS/2.
>
>Wait and see what the price of NT is, then maybe you can complain.
>Until then, your complaints are based on speculation which is most
>probably incorrect.

As are yours.  Who is right?  My guess leans towards him.>
>
>petesk@microsoft.com
>My Opinions...
>

-- 
Stacy John Behrens
*===)-------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy