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 12:28:42 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

In article <1992Aug27.151241.28133@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Aug27.002214.12477@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>>>Well, don't be so sure.  I wouldn't try running Wing Commander under
>>>NT, for example -- something OS/2 does quite well.  And that is of
>>>CRITICAL importance.  :-)
>>I agree!  In one of my other ramblings I even said as much.. Without a change
>>in its current focus, I doubt that NT will ever handle DOS games well.
>
>Or DOS network software, or DOS CD-ROM software, or...
I agree about the network software, but disagree with the CD-ROM software.
Pretty well everybody uses MS CDEX, and I'd be very surprised if NT
didn't support those in the DOS box.  As to networking.. NT comes with
networking... why would I want to do DOS networking?

>Won't MSC run under Win-OS/2?  (Honest question -- I use TopSpeed
>Pascal.)
No... it dies a horrible death there.  I considered calling Microsoft
and asking.... but then pictured the conversation...  If somebody does
want to do this, you can get OS/2 1.X versions that run great under
OS/2, but not quite everything is there.  For example, you'll have to
dual boot DOS to run the help compiler. BTW I have the zip files
for the 1.X version that I downloaded at great expense from CompuServe.
At the time they were not on ftp-os2... if they're still not there
and somebody will tell me what to do, I can make them available.

>
>>A major part of my objection would be the cost... if I stick with the
>>Windows ones I'm safe even if NT fails and OS/2 rules the world.
>
>Sticking with the 16-bit ones, yes, but this runs counter to your
>argument above.

I can't find my counter argument above... perhaps you edited it out.
The point is that I can stay with the 16-bit ones till February, or whatever
the date is that NT comes out.  I suspect it will be immediately clear
by then which way things will go.  What I expect will happen is that NT
will ship in February, that there will 1,000 applications available,
and the choice will be clear.  (Have you seen the shareware/freeware
contest just announced in CIS and passed on in c.o.ms-windows.p.win32?)
At that time I can then upgrade to NT.  If I upgraded to OS/2 apps now, I
feel I'd definitely be risking spending money on a system that might not
make it.

I know I sound prejudiced here, but consider this, the Windows NT
developer conference had 5,000 attendees.  The OS/2 2.0 conference
in October (I'll be there if anybody wants to say hi, punch me in the nose,
etc.) is hoping to have 800.  NT isn't released, OS/2 is.  In the NT world
I see an SDK and a DDK being released months before NT ships, in the
OS/2 world I see developers desperately trying to get IBM to give them
the information and tools they need.  IBM was not able to get even
the larger vendors to say they would put there stuff on OS/2 till OS/2 2.0's
release was very near.  Already any vendor (except the people that do Describe)
I've heard touted as having OS/2 products is going to be doing NT products
too.  While it's possible things can fall through, given NT's current state,
I don't see that happening.

...
[We were discussing Borland Object Vision]
>The upgrade is $99, and they'll take your order at the Borland 1-800
>number right now.  Incidently, OV under OS/2 is 32-bit and,
>reportedly, substantially faster.  (Any OV for OS/2 users out there?)

I also here it uses REXX for macros... sounds neat.  I'm sure I'll like
the NT version.

>>>There's no stigma in running DOS and Windows applications under OS/2
>>>2.0 -- it works extremely well, and you can add native OS/2
>>DOS of course is great under OS/2.
>>W.R.T. Windows my wife would strongly disagree... the 8514 driver
>>doesn't support seemless windows, OLE between Draw and Word 2.0 doesn't
>>work, and things were generally slow (this on a 486SX with 8 megs, she
>>has an ATI Ultra card).  Things are very much faster under Windows
>>3.1.  At first we put up with problems of OS/2 as there would be a CSD
>>in June.  The last straw occured when I reported back to her from the
>>NT dev conf about NT and about the same time it became clear that OS/2
>>would not be up to snuff till September.
>
>There are two DOS settings which tremendously speed up Win-OS/2 when
>running with 8514/A -- IBM has plastered that information on every
>online service it can reach.  Check the OS/2 FAQ List, for example.

Interesting... I just looked, we did not know about this.  Too late now
though I suspect.

>
>I don't know about the OLE, except that my hunch is that you did not
>install Word and/or Draw under Win-OS/2 (and migrated from a Windows
>3.1 installation).  Win-OS/2 needs to find the OLE DLLs -- these DLLs
>come with OLE aware applications.  Installing such an application will
>install the DLLs.  However, Windows 3.1 includes them now in the base
>package.

Sorry, this one I did know about... The latest Windows Draw seems to need
some feature(s) that is(are) only in 3.1.

>
>As for seamless Windows, true, but, playing devil's advocate a moment,
>Windows 3.1 doesn't run OS/2 applications seamlessly or otherwise.

In deference to your service to the community as the OS/2 FAQ person I'll
leave out my standard joke.

>
>>In short, barring Microsoft majorly screwing up, I doubt I'll ever use OS/2
>>again except at work.
>
>It has happened before (read: MS OS/2).  :-)

Hmmm... I read it as MS/IBM OS/2, and in all honesty can't really
see why one would believe IBM over MS.  In truth the real problem was most
likely that the two could not work together.

>
>-- 
>Timothy F. Sipples      | The OS/2 FREQ. ASKED QUESTIONS LIST is avail. from
>sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/faq.
>Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | Or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP").
>Chicago, 60637          | Hey GOP: The Economy, Stupid!


Brian
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy