From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 VS NT! The Future War Looms...
Date: 26 Sep 92 19:15:56 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Sep25.022022.8359@fcom.cc.utah.edu>, brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (B
rian Sturgill) writes:
>In article <1992Sep24.221253.12511@microsoft.com> petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Sk
elly) writes:
>...
>>I guess my fatal mistake in this thread was assuming you'd actually read
>>my post to get some information out if it (i.e. pete doesn't think it wise
>>to overuse threads).  Silly me, this is the advocacy group, people don't
>>wan't knowledge here, they want flame-targets.
>>
>>petesk@microsoft.com
>>My Opinions...
>
>
>I know exactly how Pete feels... there are just too many people in this
>group that simply choose not to read what you say.  Worse, they
>twist it all around.

Yes, you do.
>
>In trying to point out the fact that IBM has it's own set of problems
>w.r.t. to delivery slipages and hype, it took me three weeks to get the
>message even slightly through.  In the end I had to resort to putting
>in a whole day of my small free time to collecting IBM's own words
>to prove my case.  What do I get for it... well some people read it,
>understood the point... and that's all I asked.  The more vocal
>accuse me of trying to destory OS/2.... I think if you look at the
>whole of my past points, I've never tried to do this.  I am simply
>critical of IBM's performance.  And w.r.t. to NT and Windows 3.X (at least
>in the past six months) Microsoft's performance has been excellent.
>
IBM has problems?  Noooo.  Really?  The only people who don't realize that are
the really hard core zealots.  They only people who don't relize MS has
problems are its zealots, and various employees.  If you claim that this is
all you are trying to point out, then you should have no trouble pointing out
the problems with MS, no?  Unless this is something personal...
I differ greatly on my opinions about MS and Windows and NT.  Let's just say
that I am less than impressed.  Windows IMNSHO sucks.  They apps are good
which is its one saving grace.  NT appears to be pretty good, but it has to
have better DOS/Win support and require less resources before I can seriously
consider it.  Besides that I don't like MS's style of trying to ram these
systems down my throat.  I'm willing to listen, but don't push too hard.

>I tried to correct the misperception in this group that OS/2 could
>possibly have 1,000,000 users.  I made reasoned arguments... all
>I got was abuse.  Even with all the evidience I've collected... there
>are still people running around claiming vast numbers of OS/2 users.
>David Charlap's post earlier makes it clear that he still won't face
>facts.

Yes you tried.  You may very well be right.  But you cannot prove it, so it
was a pointless waste of time on your part.  You don't seem to want to face
facts either.  NT isn't even close to as perfect as you seem to think.
>
>A couple of weeks ago, I tried fighting fire with fire... that unfortunately
>only created a fire storm.  I would give up, but e-mail (and a few posts)
>shows that not all people are unreasonable that read this group.
>The zealots in this group should stop for a moment and consider which
>they want, yelling that noone has time to read, or intelligent debate
>and _information_.

Well, you know what they say about fire.  Don't play with it if you don't
want to get burned.
>
>
>Brian
>--
>C. Brian Sturgill                I strongly encourage you to read Ross Perot's
>University of Utah                             United We Stand
>Center for Software Science             How we can take back our country.
>brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373  (It's more important than OS/2 vs NT! :-))
>

Stacy John Behrens
*===)-------------