From: brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Subject: Re: X is a hack? (was Re: NT goes "late Beta" in 8 weeks!)
Date: 27 Aug 92 14:58:16 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

In article <1992Aug27.163503.26439@msi.com> bill@msi.com writes:
>Brian Sturgill (brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu) wrote:
>: In article <1992Aug26.171756.17033@msi.com> bill@msi.com writes:
>: >1) Why is X a hack?
>: It's a glue-on on top of Unix (i.e. it's not well integrated).  I purports
>: to be a GUI, but has a fair number of standard features missing.
>
>1) What do you mean "it's not well integrated".  Do you mean it doesn't
>use Unix for any of its services, oh, like networking?
X uses Unix, but Unix (in general) does not use X.

>: >3) What native apps would you like?

I'm confused about why people are doing this to me.... The questions
above were not questions I asked, but questions somebody asked
me.  I personally intend to continue using 16-bit Windows apps until
the current OS battle shakes out.  It is my opinion that NT will
eventually have both more apps and better 16-bit Windows support, but
obviously I can't KNOW that yet.  I see no reason to spend my money
on OS/2 2.0 apps until it's clear that OS/2 will have as many apps
as NT.  With the way OS/2 2.0 currently handles 16-bit windows apps
I see little reason why a user that uses mainly Windows apps would prefer
it to Windows 3.1.  If you do mainly command-line stuff then OS/2 is
clearly better.  I also believe that the next new nifty apps I'd like to
have will be on NT long before they are on OS/2.

...
>: The only shareware we have registered (and thus that we use) is
>: a CD-ROM CD-player program.  I'm currently re-evaluating WinQVT, but
>: it's still buggy, so I'm not sure i'll buy... zmodem transfer works well
>: though.
>
>OS/2 has a CD player.  There are OS/2 native transfer programs.

One that works without having to pay $149 for MM extentions... if so, bring
it on, I can use it at work.

>1) As I pointed out, OS/2 meets (or will before WindowNT will) your native
>apps needs.

We shall see... I sincerely doubt (without some real changes at IBM) that
TurboTax will be available under OS/2 natively.

>2) Why are willing to use 16-bit apps under NT and not OS/2?  Sounds like
>a double standard to me.

I'm not willing to use 16-bit apps under NT ... yet, currently things
are far too slow.  On the other hand I do believe that NT will, when it
hits true beta, support 16-bit apps better than OS/2 does currently.
Why would anyone believe that OS/2 can/will support 16-bit windows apps
better than NT?  At the very least I would expect that Microsoft will
do things to make it difficult for IBM after the current contract expires.

>3) From what I have heard, NT will not have the robust DOS support that
>OS/2 has.  Right now its 16-bit support is pitiful (from what I've
I can confirm this for you, it is pitiful... currently.
>heard), and Microsoft is only committing to the 100 top DOS (probably
>mostly Windows apps).  OS/2 had great DOS support early in its
>pre-release stage, when will NT have that support?
>
>I am hearding two things from you:
>1) You don't like OS/2 because it doesn't have the app support you want.

No I "don't like" OS/2 because I don't believe it will have
the app base I believe NT will. And yes I realize that attitudes like
mine are what keeps it that way.  The point is that attitudes like mine
seem to be prevelent in most of the PC world at the moment.

>2) You like Windows NT because it has multi-user capabilities, but you
>don't care about the app support, because you will go with the 16-bit
>apps for a while.

There are several features of NT that OS/2 does not have, or at least
charges high prices for.  These are important to me, even at home:
Logons, peer-to-peer networking, multi-media, good 16-bit Windows
support, ...

>Am I reading this wrong?  Or is this another case of Windows NT bias?
>Just curious.
Well I biased toward NT in the sense I like its base features better
than OS/2's base features.  Also I believe that NT will eventually
have a much better app selection.  OS/2 could prove me wrong (and I won't
cry if it does -- in fact I'll be as happy (that is if I haven't purchased
NT apps by then)) but that's not the way the crowd seems to be betting and
NT is showing better signs of delivering than what OS/2 shows currently.

Brian