From: airhart@lub001.lamar.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Egghead flyerupdate
Date: 28 Dec 92 15:02:54 +1700
Organization: Lamar University - Beaumont

 
> I was also wondering why IBM chose to put black and white ads in the
> latest issues of the various rags, listing the awards OS/2 2.0 garnered
> at Comdex. On one hand, color would sure have made some of those awards
> look prettier and eye-catching. On the other hand, B&W can be
> eye-catching by contrast to all the color. I just think they should have
> made most of the ad black and white, and then maybe put "OS/2 2.0" in
> gold lettering, that would have looked very impressive.

This statement says something VERY sad about the times we live in. It is
proposed by someone IN the computer arena that we should use cheap marketing
techniques to promote something that CAN stand on its own value and beat any
other PC desktop OS on the market today. SAD, SAD, SAD.........

Personally I avoid giving the "PRETTY COLOR" ads any preference and look for 
the substance of the ad.  Any user that requires a flashy package to be
convinced of the values of a program/OS/book may be in the wrong field.

This really is not a flame directed towards the sender of the post, but more a
general complaint as to the status of our industry.
I do however agree that IBM is WAY late on promoting such a wonderful product.
IBM is finally getting on the right track and has the size and power and
corporate ideals to get the job done over the next decade. Look at the OS/2 box
for example. It does not jump out from the shelf at you saying "Buy me, I am
cute!". I guess that can be bad for someone who likes nothing but games and
ignores the plain boxes. BUT, what the OS/2 box does says is, "This product
performs functions that mere DOS dreams of." And it does what it says. I wonder
what the NTs (Not There still) will say. Maybe, "Buy me because we are the
world, there are no others." What kind of features will be left after Billy has
to rush it to market because OS/2 is becoming popular with the educated class
of computer users. 
<Change of subject>
And the bad press, just like with the last election, give
them a cause and they will say anything to sell their wares. 

I was crazy enough to read an article (if you can call it that, it sounds
more like a poorly disguised ad for $S NTs) by Scott Spanbauer in the 
December 1192 issue of PC World. 
I must quote something: "For a while it looked as if OS/2 might step in
to replace doth DOS and Windows [Windoze]. But imperfect Windows [Windoze]
support *1, unresolved hardware compatibility problems *2, and a dearth of
unique *3, native OS/2 applications have made it more difficult for OS/2 to find
much gainful work on people's desktops *4!." 

The article goes on to basically
lie to people about the virtues of something that does not even exist in
reality yet(I know it is in beta, but if they fix all of the bugs it would take
years to come to GA).

*1 - [he is right, it runs to good to be windoze]
*2 - [what, it won't run on a 286 or a lame 386sx? So what!
      imagine how picky NTs will be. 12mb of RAM, great, limited backward S/W
      support...etc.] 
*3 - Hummm, there are almost 1000 NATIVE OS/2 apps, besides the fact that a 
     VAST majority of the DOS and WINDOZE apps run better under OS/2 than under
     their "native" environments.
*4 - I recently took on a task that would have been nearly impossible under
      DOS and the UAEs would have driven me crazy under Windoze. OS/2 provided
      the stability I needed and the numerous tasks I ran at the same time were
      ALL DOS based. 

Lets get the record straight here once and for all. 

OS/2 is HERE today. It works well for most people. IBM has made a VERY LARGE
commitment to it and will be there to stand behind it. IBM LIKES people that
develop S/W for OS/2, because they are not trying to do it all themselves.
IBM has been behind OS/2 long before it was a serious threat to $S. In fact
until recently (89/90) Billy [I want it all for me] Gates was bragging about how
wonderful OS/2 was going to be and that it would eventually replace DOS.

Windoze NT is STILL not there. It will work for SOME people. $S is unable to
put as much manpower and money into NT for obvious reasons. $S writes their own 
S/W for Windoze (which some of them are good), which puts them trying to get 
market share from companies such as WordPerfect, Lotus, etc. This has its
obvious problems (which the FTC is looking into as we read this).

I know many of you NTs supporters are chomping at the bit to flame me on one or
more points, but while you sit there and dream about OZ, I have been running 3
DOS apps, 1 WIN app, and BETA Testing a new OS/2 app, all on a computer that was
found on a trash heap. What are you running? Sorry, couldn't resist.

_________________________________________________________________________
Michael Airhart			| Disclaimer: Anyone crazy enough to 
MIS Senior @ 			| believe that I would (or want to) speak
Lamar University, Beaumont, TX.	| for someone else should seek prompt
AIRHART@LUB001.LAMAR.EDU	| professional help.
=========================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy