HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 and NT at Comdex
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:35:19 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

In article <OLAVT.92Dec10113829@ulrik.uio.no> olavt@ulrik.uio.no (Olav Torvund) writes:
> In article <1992Dec9.211907.19367@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
> 
> 
>    The question that remains is why?  I mean if OS/2 has shipped 1 million
>    or 2 million or whatever numbers of copies, why haven't ISVs came around?
>    My only guess is that OS/2 doesn't really have many desktop users, otherwise
>    I cannot believe the market would be ignored.
>    The lack of good developers tools hurts too.
> 
>  We have a situation where a lot of ISV's did not believe in the
> success of OS/2, and did not want to use resources on OS/2
> development. Instead they decided to waist their resources on NT
> deveolpment.
> 
> We might very well end up in a situation similar to Win and OS/2
> sales, but this time the ISV's that develop for OS/2 will have
> success, those who develop for NT will not.

WARNING! Speculation follows....
 
These "ISV's" may have believed that NT would be out by 4q92. They may have
thought OS/2 was going no where. 
 
Now.....it seems that spending '92 developing for OS/2 (as Proportional
Software and others have done) would have been a good bet, while starting the
NT development effort in 4q94/1q93 would have worked out. 
 
But hind sight is usually 20/20, isn't it? I would think that with Mirrors,
these ISV's could port to OS/2 in a few weeks without greatly impacting the NT
effort. OK, mirrors isn't great, but it lets you get a pplace in the market. 
 
With Win-apps being a commodity (they all look the same, don't they? - see
Borland's reasons for recent layoffs) writing applications for the growing
OS/2 market would be a good strategic move. It could give applications
some alternatives if they find themselves steam-rollered by the big boys in
the Windows market.
 
You don't have to be a multi-billion dollar company to wirte good software,
but it appears you do have to be if you want to sell good software.
 
OS/2's market could be a good chance for some small companies to become bigger
companies.
 
Steve

-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | On Sept. 19th, 88% of NZ voters opted
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         | for proportional representation. It
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            | looks like we may get a more  
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       | democratic system "real soon now".
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Subject: Re: Discovered: Microsoft using undocumented calls in Windows NT
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:17:48 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.215622.29332@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Dec12.141253.875@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Dec12.120941.20599@donau.et.tudelft.nl> linstee@dutecaj.et.tudelft.nl (Erik van Linstee) writes:

>And I can hardly believe someone could be so stupid and ill-mannered
>as the posts I've seen from you lately.  Tell me, just how many
>languages do YOU speak perfectly and idiomatically, and when did
>prefect grammar IN ENGLISH become the mark of being an educated person
>ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD BUT ENGLISH SPEAKING COUNTRIES?
>
>[In case you haven't figured it out yet, clueless, take a look at the
>return address of the post you're responding to.  Then go read the
>netiquette documents again.]
>
>>>Anyway, this is not meant as any sort of personal insult, just
>>>an observation.
>
>>	Anyway, this is not meant as any sort of personal 
>>	insult, just an observation.
>
>This is meant as a personal insult AND an observation.  Buy a clue,
>Yamanari.  It appears to be the only way you'll ever have one.

Fred, you <words unable to describe disdain>, couldn't this have been 
said in email?!  This appears to be another manifestation of your need
for attention.  BTW--*I* am posting this because I *know* you're just
bouncing my mail--and I feel this needs to be said. (apologies to all, it
need not be said in a .advocacy group).

Get a clue, Fred.EXE is just trying to as obnoxious as it always is.

Sarcasm mode off.

>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Perhaps, because nobody'd trust you to speak for them :)

You oughtta read nettiquete yourself.

My opinions.
Yep, they're just opinions.
Joe

Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:10397 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3233
From: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: ftc and ms
Date: 20 Dec 92 20:21:50 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Dec20.3155.5785@dosgate>, "richard anstruther" <richard.anstruther@canrem.com> writes:

|> If it were only a question of other OS's, Lotus, Borland and WP
|> wouldn't care one way or the other.  It's applications too, or
|> more specifically, MS's alleged habit of using its virtual
|> monopoly in OS's 

First of all Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly on OS's.  If you want to
run DOS programs and you don't want to go to Microsoft you can buy
DR DOS from digital research.  And windows is facing very stiff competition
from OS/2 now, and when Solaris from Sun, NeXTSTEP from NeXT, Taligent from
Apple and IBM come out next year, nobody can say that the end user 
faces a lack of options in the marketplace.

|> to leverage other companies' apps out of the
|> marketplace by giving its own application programmers the inside
|> track to upcoming changes and undocumented features in the OS.

Would somebody please tell me exactly what is wrong with that?  Besides
whining "its not _fair_!!!"  Microsoft owns Windows and DOS.  What Microsoft
wants to reveal or not reveal isn't anybody's business but Microsofts.

If Lotus, Borland, WP, Novel, et al don't like how Microsoft plays, they 
don't have to play with Microsoft.  Let them develop for UNIX or the Mac or
OS/2 or VMS or OSF/1 or NeXTSTEP or TOS or AmigaDos DR DOS or the Acorn
instead.
From: rlosee@unlinfo.unl.edu (Robert Losee)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why OS/2 will DEFINITELY fail
Date: 15 Dec 1992 16:54:07 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln	
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: unlinfo.unl.edu

nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:

>olavt@ulrik.uio.no (Olav Torvund) writes:

>>   OS/2 has been sold over 1M, but Windows 3.1 is selling over 1M per month.

>>OS/2 2.0 has sold 2 mill by now. Not as many as Windows, but a
>>significant market. The OS/2 market is likely to be a mroe critical
>>market, and they will probably BUY more apps.

>More vertical apps, maybe. OS/2 users are either home users who don't buy the
>250 dollar mainstream business apps, or users using it for servers and other
>related types of things.

Is this your experience or a guess?  

It is not my experience.  I know of one home user (me); my wife (who
support OS/2 for the State of Nebraska) and I together know of about
600 OS/2 systems in use, the vast majority in business applications
and programmer/analyst support, NOT in servers and I presume your
definition of "related types of things".
--
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Robert D. Losee                 BITNET: ucas402@unlvm
University of Nebraska          Internet: rlosee@unlinfo.unl.edu
Lincoln NE  68588-0496          Phone: (402) 472-7663
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Rude behavior on this group.
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: world,local
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:37:30 GMT

In <1992Dec13.200650.7979@microsoft.com> richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut) writes:

>In article <1992Dec6.010247.4166@muddcs.claremont.edu> tlilley@jarthur.claremont.edu (Thomas (Ted) Lilley) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec5.134858.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin) writes:
>>>OS/2 may have gotten off to a better start if it had convinced machine
>>>sellers to throw it in whether the customer wanted or not.  I see nothing
>>>wrong or immoral about including freebies in the computer purchase.

>>"Freebies"?  Any computer seller who'll give you Windows for free is non-
>>existant.  If they have to pay for the software, the cost  gets passes along
>>to the buyer.

>Not necessarily so.  In a competitive market, and "competitive" amply
>describes the market for IBM compatible personal computers, vendors eat
>those costs because passing the costs on would raise one's prices above
>one's competitor's prices.

>Just to head off the next argument that's headed my way, I want to point
>out that a correlation between system price and the price the vendor pays
>for bundled software doesn't prove that the vendor is passing the costs on.
>That's because the causal link cannot be established.  The higher price
>that the vendor is able to charge for the system with the bundled software
>is more likely to be due to consumer demand (a computer which includes
>system software is more desireable than a chunk of hardware on which one
>must bootstrap system software) than it is due to a vendor trying to cover
>costs.


>I would suggest that a good number of the readers of these newsgroups
>enroll in a few Economics courses before trying to argue about the effects
>of licensing agreements on computer prices.

Some of us have.  In fact, some of us have taken more than a few
Economics courses.  The reasoning about how getting DOS and Windows
even when you don't want it is 'free' is, in my opinion, bogus.  I may
only be paying a few dollars for it (given rumours about some of the
sweetheart deals that MS cuts with vendors who force it to be sold
with the machine), but I'm still paying for it.  Anyone who believes
otherwise should probably get outdoors with a bucket, lest it start
raining soup and they miss it.


-- 
"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.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: pkedrosk@student.business.uwo.ca (Paul S. Kedrosky)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! :)
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 02:12:32 GMT

goyal@utdallas.edu (MOHIT K GOYAL) writes:

[stuff about FTC's impending decision against Microsoft]

The decision and its likely form have been more than strong rumours on
the street for months now. Ho hum. Let's wait and see what
happens, the street expectation is that it won't be anything important
from an overall earnings impact perspective.

Paul



 __________________________________________________________________________
     Paul S. Kedrosky              __/ "In a certain village in La Mancha,
    pkedrosk@business.uwo.ca      __/ which I do not wish to name, there
   University of Western Ontario __/ lived not long ago a gentleman..."
  (519) 679-2111 x5174          __/  
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: linstee@dutecaj.et.tudelft.nl (Erik van Linstee)
Subject: Re: Discovered: Microsoft using undocumented calls in Windows NT
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:13:27 GMT

rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:

>In article <1992Dec13.115359.2369@donau.et.tudelft.nl> linstee@dutecaj.et.tudelft.nl (Erik van Linstee) writes:
>>First of all, whats wrong with it? Second, have you considered
>>that I am not a native English speaking person?

>	Try using a comma or two.

And that you call a grammar issue?!

>	First of all, it does not matter that you are an
>	English speaker or not.  The issue is not your grammar,
>	but the condescending and stupid nature of your post.

>	Comments on .sig files are just one step below 
>	spelling flames on the scale of stupidity.  It is wholly
>	inapropriate to this group--even as an .advocacy group--
>	and should be done in email, if you're going to be that 
>	juvinile.

Obviously you have a problem reading. My problem was not
with his .sig file. Read it again. Anyway, as I read earlier
you are still a student, so you still have room to grow.

>	Putting a little "this is not meant as an insult" 
>	after commenting that someone might be some name-hungry
>	secretary does not make it any less of an insult.

So calling someone a secretary is an insult, right? Hope you
never get one. Anyway, don't you think Brian is man enough
to stand up for himself if he feels insulted? Or do you feel
obliged to reply to anything?

> 
>	"What do you call a black man in a suit?"
>	"Oh, it's just a joke--ha ha--not an insult."

>	Yeah, right.

You have a lot to learn my friend.

Erik
(common courtesy to put your name to something you write)

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
From: pathak@mitre.org (Heeren Pathak)
Subject: OS/2 2.1 Info from PC Week
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Organization: Mitre Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:23:39 GMT

Paraphrased from PC Week: December 14, 1992 page 3

Headline: IBM Readying OS/2 Version 2.1

IBM is preparing to release OS/2 2.1.  This upgrade incorporates
enchancements and bug fixes offered in the Service Pack, Multimedia PM/2,
and Windows 3.1 compatibility.  The Windows 3.1 compatibility will run 386
enchanced mode applications.

Looks like IBM figured out how to get around Windows DPMI implementation
weirdness.  I gather this is why it took so long for IBM to release the
Windows 3.1 compatible fix.  Can anyone with access to the latest PDK
confirm or deny this?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heeren Pathak                      | Millions long for immortality who do 
pathak@mitre.org                   | not know what to do with themselves
Mitre Corporation                  | on a rainy Sunday afternoon.
(617) 271-7465                     |	               	-- Susan Ertz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Mine not Mitre's.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: sl313028@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Jazz (I've got))
Subject: Re: Here's some Advocacy for you.
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 05:59:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.210451.22317@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>In article <1gdgb9INNiia@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> gupw@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Paul Wagland) writes:
>>>	Can't anyone out there make a better argument than formatting
>>>	floppies (stupid) or 1/4th greater memory requirements?  
>>
>>OK, how about cost? A person I know who went to the NT developers
>
>
>	At least you tried.
>
>>conference told me that MS was saying that the single user version of NT
>>will be <$800, whil the full version would be <$1000.
>
>
>	I think you're confused.  MS has said repeatedly that the
>	price of NT would be "under $500".  I think maybe your friend
>	is thinking of some sort of developer version.
>
> 
>>me $500, that is still two and a half times as much as OS/2. And too me,
>>who has no need of networking, security features and all the rest
>>of the jazz, it isn't worth the cost.  If I neeeded it, then maybe it
>
>
>	True, the question is not only "do I need this?" 
>	(networking, which I don't need (but might be OK to have)
>	 security, which I'd like, Unicode, a better solution to 
>	 the 8.3 file name problem (dual, confusing--but better
>	 than nothing..), better Windows support and, most
>	 importantly, rock solid) 
>
>	The question is, if OS/2 support continues to 
>	lag and be, for the most part, nonexistant, 
>	"Do I have a choice?"
yes, NeXTSTEP486. :|
>
>
>-- 
> Snout: O Bottom, thou art chang'd!  What do I see on thee?          
> Bottom: What do you see?  You see an ass-head of your own, do you?  
> ---"I despise mystics, they fancy themselves so deep, when they----
> ----aren't even superficial"    --Nietzsche   ---------------------
-jon
From: timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re:  More Controversial Topics
Date: 14 Dec 92 01:25:21 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <Joe.007r@twistor.dialix.oz.au> Joe@twistor.dialix.oz.au (Joe Katnic) writes:
>In article <1992Dec8.205713.18213@netcom.com> timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol) writes:
>>In article <Joe.0079@twistor.dialix.oz.au> Joe@twistor.dialix.oz.au (Joe Katnic) writes:
>>>   IBM currently sells the PS/2 295, SYMETRIC MUTLIPROCESSOR, 
>>>   running - you guessed it - OS/2.
>>>   Available at your local IBM store...
>>>
>>>   Sorry, all you NT advocates missed the boat again...
>>
>>Well, that's very nice.  However you forget to mention that the version
>>of OS/2 that it runs is the server version (Lan Manager or something?),
>>not the OS/2 2.0 that you run on you desktop system.  Very different things.
>>
>>>Joe Katnic  Perth, Western Australia  Joe@twistor.DIALix.oz.au      _--_|\ 
>>
>>     - Mike
>
>   So What?
>   I also didn't mention that the PS/2 295 has a minimum price
>   tag of $12,000 AUS. It looks like a small AS/400. Just something
>   that every user is going to have on their desktop!
>
>   You stated that OS/2 does not TODAY support S-M-P. I proved
>   it does. Not everyone is going to want S-M-P. Currently the
>   version of OS/2 that can to S-M-P is used for a MASSIVE server.
>   We are talking alots of GBytes disk space. 

Number One:  I stated nothing of the kind.  Go back and read your
     attributions.  I merely pointed out that you aren't exactly
     correct.  Just for you, though, I will now state: "OS/2 does
     not TODAY support S-M-P."

Number Two:  The version of OS/2 you have does not support SMP.  In
     fact, no released version of OS/2 supports SMP.  The important
     part here is that the "S" in "SMP" means "Symmetric" -- any
     process can run on any processor.  The version of OS/2 that
     runs on the 295 is not symmetric.  (It's not version 2.0, either).


>   By time most people start to want to use S-M-P, IBM will have
>   had experience in S-M-P under OS/2 and will be positioned to
>   use that knowledge to their advantage.
>
>   P.S. How many OS's has MicroSoft produced that do S-M-P ?
>            Answer: Windows NT (not yet Avail.) = 0.

Released?  None.

>        How many OS's has IBM produced that do S-M-P ?
>            Answer: MVS, VM, DOS/VSE, AIX, OS/2 = 5.

For a PC?  None.

>Joe Katnic  Perth, Western Australia  Joe@twistor.DIALix.oz.au      _--_|\ 

     - Mike
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: rkl@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (kevin.laux)
Subject: Re: Rude behavior on this group.
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 17:00:11 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy

In article <1992Dec16.215923.4494@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> In <1992Dec15.192137.6763@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca> hwhalen@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Hugh Whalen) writes:
> 
> >In article <1992Dec15.183951.23430@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> >>In <1992Dec15.054239.12858@microsoft.com> richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut) writes:
> 
> >[enormous amount of stuff on passing through costs deleted]
> >>
> >>And you can bet that those costs are 'passed through', or you're
> >>looking at a vendor who won't be in business very long.
> >>
> 
> >Not necessarily. For example.

	[ profit scenario deleted ]

> Based on ZERO evidence that this happens, and the complaints of a lot
> of people who don't WANT the frigging software.  Once again, a
> somewhat less than realistic example.
> 
> In a highly competitive market, you don't have the kind of profit
> margin to eat those kinds of costs.  Take that 20% profit down to
> around 2%-5% and see what your numbers do.
> 
> >Cost is only one factor that a business considers when setting a 
> >selling price. Other factors such as price/demand, competition, etc. 
> >are often as important or more important.
> 
> You're assuming a non-competitive market that allows large initial
> profit margins.  Do you really think that that's the kind of market
> that PC cloners are looking at?

	ZERO evidence?  What you have here is an opinion.  (And opinions
are what you have when you don't have the facts.  (If you had the facts, you
wouldn't need an opinion.))

	Complaints of a lot of people?  Who said so?  And how does HE know?

	My gripe is that the example was illustrative of the Law of Diminishing
Marginal Returns, a very basic economic principle.  You seem to be saying that
this is no longer applicable to the marketplace.

	Btw, which profit margin are we talking about?  Gross or net?  From
the example, it's gross.  The 2-5% range would be a good figure for net.  And
net would include those other factors mentioned.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________________
	R. Kevin Laux				Email: rkl1@hound.att.com
	AT&T Bell Labs				Voice: (908) 949-1160
	Holmdel, NJ 07733			Fax:   (908) 949-0959
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: cytan@esther.msc.cornell.edu (Tan Cheng Yang)
Subject: Re: Can we get the details of the benchmark
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:10:52 GMT

Hi Brian,
      If you do not believe Mr Sipples' results, I would suggest that you
perform the benchmarks yourself. Finally, please stop whining.

Tan
Keywords: 

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
From: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (Jeremy Mathers)
Subject: Getting thru to ATI tech support (Was: Re: ATI driver support!)
Summary: It can't be done, but it takes the patience of a saint!
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 07:09:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.030524.487@zooid.guild.org> Mark Kovarski <kovarski@zooid.guild.org> writes:
...
>There seems to be a problem with the ATI phone system. You can not ring
>through. Technical Support lines, fax lines, BBS lines are all busy
>whenever somebody calls. I seriously doubt they are so busy that it
>takes over 2 weeks to get to the Bulletin Board System. I will give
>them on monday a call and talk to a manager responsible with this
>matter. If I can't get through, I will drive to ATI HQ and talk to
>them directly. I will post the results as soon as I have them.

Whenever I have had to get in touch with them, I have had to auto-dial
(in one form or another), but I have gotten thru, eventually.  It is
almost criminal that they don't have any kind of answering system set up.

************************************************************************
La plus belle fille du monde ne peut
donner que tout ce qu'elle a.

	- pynq@quads.uchicago.edu, who is still costing the net
	  hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars, every time he posts -
************************************************************************