From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:22:39 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <1992Aug19.192827.441@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>
>That's right, and it's my choice to say, "Hey, Microsoft, remember the
>CUSTOMERS?" and their choice to say, "To hell with the customers.  If
>they don't want to buy a CD-ROM, screw 'em."  And my choice to point
>out what a poor attitude that is for a software SELLER.
>

Yes... but remember, the "customer" are developers.  Is it valid for me
to criticize Apple, Inc. for distributing their SDK to run ONLY on 
Macintoshes?  Don't they realize that most of the computers used in the
world are 80x86 based?  What a poor attitude for a SELLER(!)  :)

Seriously, we're talking about DEVELOPER's.  I can buy a CD-ROM drive
and write it off.  No problem.  A "user" may have a problem--but "users"
aren't who the SDK is aimed for.

>>There is no pressing need for 1.44mb floppies either (200K of extra data
>>storage for how much more money per disk??)  But the merits of the floppy
>>spoke for itself--until you are hardpressed to find any new computer that
>>DOESN'T have one.
>
>Quite right.  And have you seen anyone distribute software ONLY on
>1.44 MB floppies to 'drive the market'?  Hell, even IBM, who was
>pushing the things, offers OS/2 on both sizes.  An OPTION for CD-ROM
>makes sense; demanding it does not.  Microsoft has basically told the
>developers of the world that if they don't buy a CD-ROM like
>MIcorosoft wants that they can just go pound sand.  Fine, but it's a
>corporate attitude that they have always been noted for and which I
>find more and more in evidence of late, as the company start feeling
>pressured by the unexpected success of OS/2 2.0 and pressure on another
>cash cow of the company, MS-DOS, from the folks at Digital Research.


I have seen many companies distribute software ONLY on high density
floppies... mostly on the high-end software market.  Software aimed for
a developer for a particular -type of machine can more justifiably be
"forced" for a particular configuration.  Any developer not ready to
spend $200-$300 for capitalization isn't a developer (as an OS
manufacturer) that would make or break the manufacturer.

>
>Exactly right.  A VARIETY of formats.  To reach a variety of users.
>As in not saying that if you don't have a CD-ROM, we're not interested
>in anything you might develop and we don't give a damn about your
>ability to load this Alpha software.
>

Correct.  But Sierra is distributing the finished product.  Microsoft is
not.

>
>Oh, I would choose it PREFERENTIALLY, too.  I would also, however,
>recognize that the world does NOT all own CD-ROM drives and make
>provisions for that.  But not Microsoft.  THEY will write the rules
>for the market, and you'd better by God march to their music.

Only for the SDK.
If they did the same for the final release.... then I'd wonder.

.
.
. More of the same deleted.  
.
.

>>But that doesn't stop you from buying audio CD's, does it?  If you wan't
>>to store your own stuff, buy a hard disk.  One shouldn't complain that a
>>tool is useless because it only does what the tool is designed for--and 
>>not what YOU want it for.  I'm not upset that my wirestripper doesn't
>>unscrew screws--I just buy a screwdriver.
>
>Would you be upset if the major nail manufacturer set things up so
>that you couldn't drive their new nails unless you had a wire
>stripper, even though you never do anything else that requires one? 
>

Of course I wouldn't be upset--if the nail promises 600 times more strength,
is a thousand times less likely to be inadvertantly bent, is 600 times
better in it's grip so it won't loosen, and can be hammered 600 times
easier than the old version...  I never turn down high tech if there is
a distinct advantage that justifies the cost.


>
>Once again, great for the distributors and people who already have
>CD-ROM drives.  What about MOST of the customers, though?  One is left
>feeling like the attitude is "We are MicroBorg.  You WILL be
>assimiliated.  Resistance is futile."

MOST of the music industry customers used tape three years ago.  I've 
actually seen music stores that ONLY sell audio CD's.  Again, though,
I'm sure Microsoft will distribute their software on multiple media
WHEN IT IS COST EFFECTIVE TO DO SO (ie, the software is COMPLETED).

>
>Yes, yes, yes.  No one is arguing that from the POINT OF VIEW OF THE
>DISTRIBUTOR CD-ROM is the neatest thing since sliced bread.  However,
>last time I checked, THEY were supposed to be selling to US as
>CUSTOMERS.  That would say to me that they should at least care a
>little bit about not 'driving the market' to make everyone go out and
>buy a CD-ROM drive that they don't need for anything else except
>loading a frigging ALPHA.
>

If you're a valid developer, Microsoft probably (and rightly so) considers
that perfectly acceptable.  It is an Alpha, after all.

>
>>Ahhhhh.  The crux!  So said the fox when he couldn't reach the grapes...
>>"they're probably sour anyway..."
>
>This has been the point all along.  It took you this long to get it?
>The point is that forcing people who do not have or need CD-ROM drives
>to buy them in order to load this ALPHA software strikes me as pretty
>arrogant on the part of a company towards CUSTOMERS.

Microsoft isn't forcing you to do anything.  If you don't want to get a
CD-ROM drive to load this ALPHA software, then Microsoft (I'm presuming
here) doesn't feel you NEED to load this ALPHA software.  If you're not
willing to go to the grocery, should they send their produce to you?

>
>
>Well, this is all very wonderful for you and all that, but so what?
>What, pray tell, do you find so incredibly useful about a CD-ROM
>drive?  You do touch on one thing here, though.  In order to even come
>close to being truly useful for books, etc., you have to have SEVERAL
>of them.  Otherwise you get the joy of unloading one book so you can
>load another one, when all you wanted to do is take a quick look in the
>second one before you continued with the first one.  Personally, for
>that sort of thing, paper makes more sense.
>

One CD has Microsoft Bookshelf on it (I use it a lot!).  Another has
So Much Shareware (for my BBS, but it comes in useful when I'm looking
for something), the other has Simtel 20 archives (also for my BBS, but
also very useful).  All this stuff is on my network so everything is
accessible from everything else.

True, not many people have the luxuries I have... but just because I
can't afford a Ferrari Tessarossa doesn't mean it's an awful car.  Just
because you can't own a CD-ROM drive (for whatever reason) doesn't mean
that the company that ONLY supports it is into some grand conspiracy.

CD-ROM technology is useful as applied to computers.  I have a 2 gig
tape backup on my network--and it gets used FAR less than the CD-ROM
drives.  This doesn't mean that my hard disks are useless... but it
(CD ROMs) does augment my system very well.
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:1942 comp.os.os2.advocacy:4236