From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft blasting IBM into the dust?
Date: 10 Nov 92 19:18:47 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <3305@accucx.cc.ruu.nl>, nevries@accucx.cc.ruu.nl (Nico E de Vries) w
rites:
>Lately I have been amazed at comp.os.os2.advocacy. Most discussions
>(95%?) seem to cover "if Windows 3.1 is an OS". Very interesting probably
>but is everyone blind for what is really happening here?
>
>While IBM is trying to get Windows 3.1 out the door the next generation of
>Windows has already been released. No not NT but WfW. The produkt is so
>damned impressive Novell started sueing MS right away. According to many
>who have seen the produkt its network support is very impressive. Autodetect
>of network adapters, networks etc. Tranparant integration in Windows etc.

Novell is sueing not because it is an impressive product, but becuase
Microsoft is trying to extend the license they have on certain Novell
compatibility software from Windows 3.1 to WfW by claiming that they are the
same product.  How they can claim this with a strait face is beyond me.  The
products are quite different and easy to tell apart.  I think that MS will
loose this lawsuit in any case.

        (some stuff deleted)
>
>More and more I begin to believe IBM is just NOT capable of doing it.
>Even thought they where the first with a 32 bit OS (at least
>a DOS+Windows+.. OS) in the press and in the eye of the public
>the seem to lag behind Microsoft. Especially their marketting is
>very disapointing. Everyone knows multimedia and networking are
>part of WfW and will be part of NT. The fact than OS/2 lacs those
>(available seperate, very week strategy IMO) isn't made very clear
>in the press at all. Some misty strategy IMO.

I think they are capable of it, but they are still going through culture
shock.  IBM is amazed that they have a product with mass appeal.  It is taking
them a long time to adjust to this.  MS has no current products that I am
aware of that don't rely at least in part on mass appeal.  They are used to
it, IBM isn't as of yet.  As for Multimedia and networking, it has been argued
(by me as well as others) that not everyone wants those things included with
the base package.  I won't use them, and really don't wan't to see the price
of the system jacked up.

>
>I think if IBM has any chance left at all then it is to release
>a more complete OS/2 INCLUDING multimedia, LAN etc etc and to release
>it in a way users can actually use. The CSD seems to take an expert to
>install. I am refering to something an idiot can use. And please oh please
>improve support for third party hardware a lot.
>
>But to be fair, I don't think this will happen before it is too late.
>
>Nico E. de Vries  (nevries@cc.ruu.nl) |------------------*   AA   III  PPP
>_ This text is supplied AS IS, no warranties of any kind |  A  A   I   P  P
>| apply. No rights can be derived from this text. This   |  AAAA   I   PPP
>| text is likely to contain spelling and grammar errors. |  A  A   I   P
>*---------------------------( Donate to GreenPeace! )----*  A  A  III  P
>
>"The IBM PC is still waiting for a version of the CP/M OS.", G.M. Vose, 1982.
>
-- 
Stacy John Behrens
*===)-------------