From: petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly)
Subject: Re: Distributed Systems
Date: 14 Aug 92 10:26:04 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Aug14.011506.130756@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS) writes:
>In article <1992Aug12.220152.20876@microsoft.com>, petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Sk
>elly) writes:
>>In article <-159819990@hpopd.pwd.hp.com> yuk@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Yuk Lun Chan) wr
>ites:
>>>>comp.os.os2.advocacy / petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) /  3:06 am  Aug  8,
> 1992 /
>>Simple accounting: use an accounting book.  Keep it in a filing cabinet.
>>wordprocessing: use a typewriter.
>>education: use teachers
>>data input: what kind?
>>
>>Oh, wait, you wanted to use Just enough technology to make your point.
>>
>>Well, I'd like to use technology a little more advanced.  286 machines
>>are getting quite cheap these days.  They run windows.  Now your workforce
>>would be allowed to use WYSWIG word processing, have a far better UI
>>in their word processing, and so on.  Education, now you can use multimedia.
>
>You know as well as I do that a 286 doesn't run Windows very well.  You need
>at least a 386sx to get to the good stuff.  Also, how many schools do you know
>of that have significant amounts of multimedia equipment?  Sound boards and
>speakers cost money, and aren't all that practical.  Also, you
>don't need NT for this, so where is the advantage?  You also don't need NT, or
>even Windows for WYSIWIG so even that is pointless.  You haven't listed
>anything that can't and isn't already being done without Windows and NT.

Oh, wait, I'm sorry, is that what you thought I was trying to do.  I
guess you looked at my email address and not the content of my message
and thought that's what I was trying to do is say that NT was the only
solution for all these problems.  Let me be more clear.  I was arguing
that text terminals were archaic for the purposes given, and gave examples
that could use a cheap 286 and windows. 

I did not explicityly say that you must go out and buy windows to do these
things, although you might have picked up on the mind control lasers beaming
messages into your brain from orbiting sattelites (;) ;) ;))

How many schools do you know that have more than a few apple II's or
TRS-80's.  (public that is).  Blame the US education system, not MS.

Sound boards aren't all that practical, for education???????
Auditory cueing is a very powerful tool in education.  So is visual
cueing.  You have highly developed visual and auditory centers in your
brain, keyed for learning, and all they give you is a bunch of hard to
read text.  It's talk like this that's kept us in the education dark
ages for so long.  Soapbox: off



>>
>>A few com cards, try 100.  yeuch.
>>How much are dumb terminals.  As I said, 286 boxes are quite cheap also.
>>Lan cards are very cheap.  100 LAN licenses are cheap.
>>So the net cost will be a bit more, the net ability of the system, though,
>>will be a whole lot more!!!
>
>Not if you use the same hardware.  You can use all the stuff you mention here
>with UNIX.  Where is the increased funtionality?

Easier system management, more integrated environment, little usability
things like that.  Plus a whole lot of other technical stuff that I'm going
to punt you off to the Release Notes for.  I think they are in the MS 
ftp site (no address now, don't know it off the top of my head).
>
>>
>>You give a UNIX system, which will be MAXED out in use.  The users won't be
>>able to use anything more complecated.  What if the UNIX box goes down.
>>For every hour it is down, you loose 100 man hours of work.
>
>FUD.  The same thing happens when an NT server goes down.  You are going to
>loose some work no matter what.  Also there is no reason you can't use PC's as
>terminals with UNIX.

When you're editing a document on a windows machine, you can save it to the
local hard disk.  When you're editing it on a terminal, well, when the
central machine goes down, you can't save it, you can't do anything.

When you're using PC's as terminals with UNIX, you have to go through a
whole lot of hassle to save it to the local disk and work on it there, so
when the UNIX machine goes down, you can continue.

>
>>
>>With the NT system, You can use most advanced Windows software as it comes
>>out.  And when the main box goes down, everyone can continue to work locally.
>>
>
>286's are cheap, but they cannot use anything close to the most advanced
>software.  Also, what precludes using 286s, 386s or whatever, with a UNIX
>system?  The answer is nothing.  You can also continue your work locally with
>UNIX.  Where is the advantage that NT has with this?  NT really is about the
>same in power. It does some things in what might be considered a slicker fashion
>but not with any increased funtionality.  This all sounds like a lot of hype.
>I want to see actual advantages not things that I can already do.  I know NT
>has some, so let's hear about them, not meaningless comparisons with
>things that the current systems handle quite easily.

Well, go manage your UNIX network and tell me how fun it is.
Go run windows software on your unix box and tell me how fun it is.
etc.
etc.


petesk@microsoft.com
My Opinions...