From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 18:52:28 GMT

In <1992Aug19.232239.29317@nosc.mil> discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:

>In article <1992Aug19.192827.441@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>
>>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.
>>

>Yes... but remember, the "customer" are developers.  Is it valid for me
>to criticize Apple, Inc. for distributing their SDK to run ONLY on 
>Macintoshes?  Don't they realize that most of the computers used in the
>world are 80x86 based?  What a poor attitude for a SELLER(!)  :)

Gee, how incredibly silly.  I figure if you want to develop for the
Mac you should expect to buy one.  If you want to develop for CD-ROM,
you should expect to buy one.  But THERE IS NO REASON TO EXPECT TO
NEED TO BUY A CD-ROM TO DEVELOP SOFTWARE FOR A PC WHICH DOESN'T
INCLUDE A CD-ROM.

>Seriously, we're talking about DEVELOPER's.  I can buy a CD-ROM drive
>and write it off.  No problem.  A "user" may have a problem--but "users"
>aren't who the SDK is aimed for.

Ah, I see.  It's all a racket to let developers buy CD-ROMS and deduct
them.  Of course, this works best with big developers.  Which explains
Microsoft's whole attitude.  They think they've become the Old IBM.
Perhaps they should take a look at the fate of Old IBM?

>I have seen many companies distribute software ONLY on high density
>floppies... mostly on the high-end software market.  Software aimed for
>a developer for a particular -type of machine can more justifiably be
>"forced" for a particular configuration.  Any developer not ready to
>spend $200-$300 for capitalization isn't a developer (as an OS
>manufacturer) that would make or break the manufacturer.

That's right, and high density floppies ARE A STANDARD PART IN ANY
MACHINE BUILT IN THE PAST 5 YEARS -- CD-ROM DRIVES ARE NOT.

>>
>>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.
>>

>Correct.  But Sierra is distributing the finished product.  Microsoft is
>not.

>>
>>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.

>Only for the SDK.
>If they did the same for the final release.... then I'd wonder.

What makes the SDK different, to your mind?

>.
>.
>. More of the same deleted.  
>.
>.

>>>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? 
>>

>Of course I wouldn't be upset--if the nail promises 600 times more strength,
>is a thousand times less likely to be inadvertantly bent, is 600 times
>better in it's grip so it won't loosen, and can be hammered 600 times
>easier than the old version...  I never turn down high tech if there is
>a distinct advantage that justifies the cost.

So just where is this 3 orders of magnitude gain in half a dozen
things that pre-Alpha NT SDK gets you by coming only on CD-ROM?


>>
>>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."

>MOST of the music industry customers used tape three years ago.  I've 
>actually seen music stores that ONLY sell audio CD's.  Again, though,
>I'm sure Microsoft will distribute their software on multiple media
>WHEN IT IS COST EFFECTIVE TO DO SO (ie, the software is COMPLETED).

And if CD-ROM on computers was as common as it is on stereos, I
probably wouldn't be complaining.  But it's not.

>>
>>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.
>>

>If you're a valid developer, Microsoft probably (and rightly so) considers
>that perfectly acceptable.  It is an Alpha, after all.

Please define 'invalid developer'.

>>
>>>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.

>Microsoft isn't forcing you to do anything.  If you don't want to get a
>CD-ROM drive to load this ALPHA software, then Microsoft (I'm presuming
>here) doesn't feel you NEED to load this ALPHA software.  If you're not
>willing to go to the grocery, should they send their produce to you?

And of course this says nothing at all to you about the Microsoft
corporate attitude?  No, of course it doesn't.  It wouldn't.

>>
>>
>>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.
>>

>One CD has Microsoft Bookshelf on it (I use it a lot!).  Another has
>So Much Shareware (for my BBS, but it comes in useful when I'm looking
>for something), the other has Simtel 20 archives (also for my BBS, but
>also very useful).  All this stuff is on my network so everything is
>accessible from everything else.

>True, not many people have the luxuries I have... but just because I
>can't afford a Ferrari Tessarossa doesn't mean it's an awful car.  Just
>because you can't own a CD-ROM drive (for whatever reason) doesn't mean
>that the company that ONLY supports it is into some grand conspiracy.

What would it mean to you if you went to pick up a delivery and they
would ONLY give it to you if you drove a Ferrari Tessarossa?

>CD-ROM technology is useful as applied to computers.  I have a 2 gig
>tape backup on my network--and it gets used FAR less than the CD-ROM
>drives.  This doesn't mean that my hard disks are useless... but it
>(CD ROMs) does augment my system very well.

Well, hip hip hooray for you, but I don't need one.


-- 
"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