From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: OS/2 VS NT! The Future War Looms...
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 01:31:17 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.163039.363@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>>Actually, IBM has stated that the oft quoted one million figure (of
>>quite some time ago, now, before TV and before most print ads) did NOT
>>include free upgrades or multiple licenses.  It included real, live,
>>NEW copies -- straight up or upgrades from DOS and Windows.
>I'm sorry, but this just isn't so. The 1,000,000 number came from the
>Ziffnet conference... not only did that conference contradict what
>you're saying, but I checked extensively to make sure what that number
>really meant.  One fellow at IBM who definitely would know, and would
>die before telling me anything the least bit detrimental to OS/2
>if it were not true... said explicitly that the 1,000,000 included everything
>but a few copies shipped electronically in the first few days of April.
>Yes the figure is more than a month old. I've seen no reason to believe
>that sales are better than linear growth, and thus my 1,250,000 number.
>As a matter of fact due to a probable slow down in upgrade applications
>I actually see reason for a slowdown in growth, but I'm assuming
>that the recent increase in advertising will offset this.

Our information simply differs, then.  But I'm not going to argue the
point, because it doesn't make much of a difference.  However you
define it, I'd call OS/2 2.0 a remarkable success -- even if one
dismissed its past.

>>OS/2 2.0 made Number 15 in the last PC Magazine software ranking,
>>incidently.  Even with direct sales through an 800 number (which are
>>excluded from PC Magazine's ranking), which make up a huge part of
>>OS/2 2.0 sales.
>Can you explain the PC Magazine ranking system then?  What did the base
>the ranking on, and what were the numbers?  I tried to find this
>issue, but they were gone by the time I knew to look.

This has been described here already in other posts.

The point remains that, five months out of the gate (actually fewer,
because the statistics are for one week in July), OS/2 2.0 has hit
Number 11 (12) in the PC Magazine Top 15 ranking, alongside such
staples as ProComm Plus 2.1 and Stacker 2.0.  The statistics are
compiled based on shipments to 12,000 dealers over a one week period
and do not include direct sales (through 800 numbers) (which,
obviously, account for a large part of OS/2 2.0 sales).

I do not dismiss those sales, and, frankly, I'm shocked OS/2 2.0 is
doing so well so soon.

>However most DOS _applications_ will work just fine under NT.
>The only problem one will run into is with things like games or
>device drivers.  I don't see this as a problem for NT.

I do.  We differ, but I think history is on my side.

>>Backward compatibility with DOS and Windows 3.x is so extremely
>>important in this marketplace, certainly on the client side, that if
>>NT is perceived as less than capable in this area it will suffer, in
>>my opinion.
>Well if IBM actually was marketing, perhaps they could _twist_ this to
>their advantage, but I don't see this as a problem for NT.

I see IBM stressing this point heavily (e.g. the "There's a place for
DOS and Windows -- and you're looking at it" print ads), and I do see
it as NT's Achilles heel.  We differ, obviously, but haven't we
learned anything from OS/2 1.x?  Substandard DOS compatibility just
isn't going to cut it -- for better or worse we'll have to bear that
millstone for some time to come.

NT's DOS support isn't going to be any better than OS/2 2.0's, and
it's extremely likely that it will be a whole lot worse, and that
concerns me.  Fair enough?

-- 
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").
of Chicago, 60637       | Family Values Means a Job
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy