From: furballs@sequent.com
Subject: Re: A personal perspective on choosing OS/2 2.0
Originator: furballs@crg8.sequent.com
Organization:  Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 00:42:20 GMT

In article <1992Apr1.153907.17907@b11.ingr.com> ross@kaos.b23b.ingr.com writes:
>>I said 'fastest growing', not 'largest'.
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Once again, a) Show me the stats  b) Who gives a rats ass???
>>
>>Let's face it, DOS/Windows sucks, and people are tired of wasting the power
>                    ^^^^^^^  Gee, John, you spelled it right here!!!
>
>>of their 386+ machines on a 16-bit OS running an ugly GUI with no protection
>>among applications and sorry multi-tasking capabilities.  You'd be surprised
>
>DOS/Windows has completely revolutionized my productivity on my PC,
>both my laptop and my desktop.  The applications suite is second to
>none on ANY platform, and if anything, the momentum is increasing.
>
>>at how many 'new OS/2 user' posts there are every week (every day?) when some
>>happy person discovers that they can ditch DOS/Windows and move on to a real
>>OS without losing their current software.  People are making the switch.
>
>Switch to what??  It isn't shipping yet, is it??  My, my.  And it's
>already April.
>>
>>Shouldn't you?
>
>Not in my lifetime.
>
>Face it, John, you're a technodweeb who loves to throw the bytes
>around and name-drop stuff like pre-emptive multitasking and
>multithreaded cooperative this and that.  Those of us in the real
>world just want to get our jobs done so we can impress our bosses and
>hit the golf course earlier.  DOS/Windows are doing that just fine now
>and will continue to do so indefinitely.  If you can't deal with that,
>then go back to the OS/2.misc area and hang out with your zealots
>and talk about us "lousy stupid Windoze users" there and just leave us
>alone.  I'm sick of it.  Right now, I'm so tired of hearing about this
>topic I wouldn't buy OS/2 now just out of spite.  If you're looking
>for converts you're going about it all the wrong way.  You don't get
>converts by dragging people to church and insulting their present
>beliefs.
>
>Ross Erickson "A loyal Microsoft Windows/Applications user" FOR LIFE
>
>Boycott OS/2. 


This is where I throw my $0.02 worth in to the ring. Ross Erickson
brings a point that can not, should not, and will not be ignored.
The bottom line for having *ANY* computer in *ANY* business
situation is increased productivity. Thats it, there is no more.

With all the aboriginal posturing that has taken place on this
thread, it amazes me no end the amount of religious warfare
conducted in the name of someone's OS.

Get a life people...

As a developer who is required to span a minimum of 3 OS platforms
on a daily basis, plus 5 different kinds of hardware, I am pretty
sure of the ground I stand on when I say the following:

Operating Systems, just like languages, have a developmental
philosophy behind them. They were concieved to solve *PROBLEMS*.
Since there are an infinite number of problems, so are the
solutions, and approachs. If the solution to *YOUR* particular
problem requires a multi-tasking OS, then you should not look at
DOS, or MAC-OS or CP/M or anything like it. It simply is not the
right answer for the situation. However, if you need something that
bares the hardware to the programmer or an embedded type controller
device, then DOS is valid option, right along with iRMX and others.
People pass judgement quickly on things they do not understand, and
from the degraded state this thread has sunk to, it clearly
demonstrates there is an ample supply of stupid to go around.

Now, having said this, I want to clarify something. People who are
non-techincal will use things that they like and are comfortable
with. DOS/Windows is not the most technically accomplished piece of
work I have seen, *BUT* it is the largest market in the computer
world, and like it or not it is here to stay. People are
comfortable with what it has to offer them, and they percieve value
from it's use. IBM recognizes this fact by providing backwards
compatibility with both environments. OS/2 has it's place for those
who need more of what DOS/Windows can not deliver, such as
multi-tasking, seamless LAN  and DB2 integration and the speed
brought on by 32 flat mode addressing. It allows people to be
relatively comfortable, by giving them the things they are most
familliar with, such as their DOS/Windows applications, and
extending to them additional capabilities. IF people like it, they
will buy it, whether it is the most whiz bang thing since sliced
bread, or sand in a can.

With the upcoming of NT, I suspect the you will again see this
backwards compatability thing played out. Frankly, I welcome both
Windows and OS/2 as two similar threads that diverge to solve a
diffrent set of problems. NT will be no different. I would prefer
to see every one working with Multi-process, parallel or neural
systems, but your average person does not have a spare $500,000
laying around burning holes in their pocket, just waiting to
calculate for themselves the coefficient of friction for the
family car, or the next days weather.

People use their computer for other things, such as writing letters
or reports, balancing checkbooks and calculating business
spreadsheets. Many of the mundane day-to-day tasks are handled
quite well by DOS/Windows or OS/2 when it comes to these kinds of
things; and if you will notice, the largest software companies
write applications to do these kinds of things. So, before you go
off half-cocked and spray technoblab all over the net in your
righteous indignation, stop and think about why things are as they
are, and you will be surprised at what you might find...


---------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinions are my own, and I work hard for them...
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.apps:2810 comp.misc:1870