From: slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Glen Anthony Graham)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs NT features list, Revision 1.2
Date: 2 Sep 92 22:17:43 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX


In article <1992Aug31.164630.13859@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:

	Mediocre Windows 3.0 support (NT's is currently poor).
Ah, Brian, your BIAS just shone through like a fusion reactor.  OS/2's Windows
support is far from "mediocre".  Please remove the word (your PERSONAL opinion)
from your list.  Many people claim that it is far BETTER.  It resists crashing
(UAEs etc) more than MS Windows 3.0   If you include any adjective, include
"superior".
	
One more feature of OS/2 2.0--> it is capable of using 16 bit drivers OR 32-bit
drivers.  

Features currently in Windows NT but not in OS/2 2.0
	System tables dynamically extensible.
		In other words no arbitrary limits of 256 processes or
		1024 open files, etc.
Golly, Gee.  I cannot see how 256 processes is really limiting my machine!!!
I do not consider a feature to be something that I have no conceivable/possible
hope of using.  256 active processes would bring a mainframe to its knees, much
less a DESKTOP personal computer.
	
		
	All but 60K kernel is pageable. (Microkernel design)
Ok, but how much of the OS/2 kernal is pageable?  Do you know for a *fact* that
it is more?  What about the entire kernal sizes?  OS/2 can page it's kernal, 
but I do not know how much by...
	
		
	Platform independent device driver support.
		Platform independence means independent of the hardware
		on which NT runs.  The device driver people at the NT
		developers conference did not seem to believe this
		at first either... but after a long set of questions seemed
		convinced this was more or less possible.
		(A smaller head file contains the few differences
		that are necessary between platforms.)
And as a result, the drivers are slower.  This is not something that interests
me, a PC user.  I appreciate fast, assembler drivers written only for Intel :-)
		
	Pen Support.
I believe this was shown waaaaay back at Spring Comdex.  I have heard of OS/2
running on a Pen machine.  
	
	Windows 3.1 support.
Demoed at Spring Comdex.  Again in the United Kingdom at a press conference in
July (July 5th, I believe).  Therefore I argue it is "there".
	
	GUI
		Fully 32-bit API
		Fast client/server approach.
		Separate queues per process.
			PM and Windows 3.X have one message queue for all
			applications.
		Designed to help accellerators.
			The internal routines have been changes so that
			drawing commands are buffered and sent to the
			underlying graphics drivers in a manner that
			can take advantage of graphics accellerator cards.
Call me ignorant, but OS/2 really takes advantage of my ATI co-processed card.
The drivers for each card take the fullest advantage of the card.  I'm sure
that IBM's XGA drivers will take the utmost advantage of it's co-processor.
		
	OLE
Doesn't OS/2 include this?  This was shown as part of OS/2 2.0 BASE system 
in April at Fall Comdex.  Lee Reiswig himself stated OLE and DLE are supported
in IBM's WIN-OS2

	Security
		C2 level (not certified)
		ACL's for all objects.
		Logons.
OS/2 is capable of fairly secure/restricted use.  Worst case scenerio is to
develop your own shell (replace WPS) with your own hooks and logins.  Best 
case is I heard about a Restricted shell running on OS/2 2.0 that provides
user login and restrictions to certain folders and applications.  
	
	Multimedia
		Audio
			Waveform
			MIDI
			CD-source
		Media Control Interface.
		High-speed file streaming.
		Async event controllable.
Please do not include these under the section "What NT has that OS/2 does not".
You above stated that OS/2 has MM extensions.  Sure they can be purchased 
above the op. sys, but that will still bring it cheaper than NT.
		
	Networking
		TCP/IP
		Peer-peer file and printer sharing.
		Ability to support multiple vendors as transports
			w/common admin.
		Good network admin facilities.
		SNMP
		Berkely sockets.
		Named pipes.
		Event logging.
Same here.  You stated that you can buy TCP/IP.  So, what are the features 
that NT ($500) has that OS/2 + MM + TCP/IP (~$550) does *NOT* have??????


OS/2 2.0 will add the following in September/October
	Catch up to NT by having Windows 3.1 support.
	Catch up to NT by adding a 32-bit GUI.
	Catch up to NT by allowing 32-bit drivers.
	Rumored to slim-down such that it might properly fit in 4 megs.

Windows NT will add the following in September/October
	Catch-up to OS/2 in 16-bit Windows 3.0 compatibility.
	Smarter, easier to use OLE, first step toward Cairo.
	POSIX  (1003.1 -- the system calls)
	Win32s (Run NT programs under Windows 3.1)
	Remote booting.
	Remote installation and maintenance support.
	NTFS
		Symlinks
		Sparse File
Granted you included the "catch-up features", but I feel the overall tone of 
this is still ANTI-OS/2.  What about OS/2 Extended Services?  That is a BIG
feature of OS/2 that your beloved, awe-inspiring, Microsoft NT does not have
available.  Covenient that you left them out.

>
>Brian
>-- 
>C. Brian Sturgill                       *** OS/2 2.0 is for YOU! ***
>University of Utah                  Microsoft needs some competition, but
>Center for Software Science        -I- want to be one of the many using NT.
>brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373           :-) :-) :-)

Please do not attempt to portray yourself as "un-biased".  You are as biased
towards NT as Gordon Letwin was, despite your protesting that you like OS/2.
 
Glen A Graham

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy