From: timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol)
Subject: Re: SMALL Excerpt from "Windows Sources"
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 22:23:30 GMT

In article <1hr8mbINN58h@cae.cad.gatech.edu> chris@cad.gatech.edu (Chris McClellen) writes:
>In <1992Dec30.031820.21424@netcom.com> timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol) writes:
>
>>In article <47798@ogicse.ogi.edu> francis@ese.ogi.edu (Francis Moraes) writes:
>>>In reference to a post by chris@cad.gatech.edu (Chris McClellen)
>>>timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol) writes:
>>>
>
>>The point is that the shipping NT should require 8 MB minimum, but this
>>minimum doesn't mean the same thing as the OS/2 minimum.  As Petzold
>>suggested (although he may be pushing it) NT should be much more usable 
>>in 8 MB (its stated minimum) than OS/2 is in 4 MB. 
>
>I read the article differently then.

Actually, I didn't read the article, only your excerpt.  It seemed that
he was talking about NTs targetted requirements, not about the current
Beta version.  However, as I said, I didn't read the article so I could
be wrong.

> It seems he was stating that the
>8 megs was a minimum if you want to run the system well.  The speed
>of NT in 8 meg is comparable to the SPEED (im not talking features)
>of OS2 in 4 meg right now.  (meaning: they both are slow as hell).

Right now I would almost agree.  I would say that NT in 8 MB is slow
as hell, but that OS/2 in 4 MB is slower than hell.  (How slow is hell,
anyway?)  But the difference isn't much.

>So when he says the minimum for both os2 and NT is 8 meg.. or rather
>says youll WANT 8 megs for either system makes it sound like NT runs
>just as well in 8 megs as OS2 does ("well" means speedwise).  This
>(in my view) makes petzold not look so bright.  If a customer came
>to me and said "Petzold said NT & OS2 run the same in 8 megs," and
>I demoed both in 8 megs, Petzold would look stupid.  Maybe I read
>the article different than you, but the statement he made was quite
>blunt, and exactly as I originally posted.  The minimum (as petzold
>seems to have defined it) for NT should actually be a bit higher than
>8 megs, which meansm BOTH companies are "not being honest."

Actually, he says "you'll want...at least 8 megs of memory".  If he's
talking about the beta version and you demoed the beta version, he
would look stupid.  But if he was talking about the non-existent final
version, and you demoed that when it was released, he would be close.
That's why I suspect that he was talking about NTs targetted requirements,
not the current beta version.

>>I didn't say he couldn't express his opinions, but posting things like
>>NT in 16 MB is the same as OS/2 in 8 MB means nothing when you don't
>>really know what you're talking about.  I've sure he's heard a lot
>>about NT, but not all of it is necessarily true, so making comparisons
>>based on faulty information is meaningless.  (Based on what he had
>
>I DID NOT SAY THAT.  Typical of people to put words in others mouths.
>I SAID: "NT in 8 megs runs about as fast as OS2 in 4 megs."  Big difference
>from what you claim I said.  You dont know what you are talking about.

Recognize the following paragraphs?

   The above quoted paragraph shows Petzold's ignorance.  He claims
   OS 2 2.0 NEEDS 8 megs to run.  Well, OS/2 runs in 4 megs about as well
   as NT runs in 8 megs.  NT Beta needs about 16 megs of memory, and alot
   of that 100 meg HD, if not all.

   ...

   So, Petzold should have said OS2 needs about 8 megs, where as NT needs
   about 16 megs.  When he said 8 megs, he was stating NT's minimum, not
   OS/2's.

You wrote them.  So, since OS/2 needs 4 MB and you're saying that NT needs
16 MB are you implying that NT in 16 MB is the same as OS/2 in 4 MB?
If what I wrote isn't what you said, what, then, do you mean when you say
that NT needs 16 MB and OS/2 needs 8 MB?

>My whole opinion was that petzold's article was garbage.  However,
>I expected an NT bigot or supporter to retout my statements with the
>famous "You dont know what you are talking about..You are ignorant.."
>etc every time you say something they dont what to hear.
>
>I was not spreading misinformation.  I was giving an opinion about petzold's
>article.  But alas, you probably didnt care.  all you probably saw
>was NT vs OS2, and that the poster uses OS2 more than NT.

Actually, I read your entire article pretty carefully.  Some main points:

     Petzold is ignorant (debatable, I suppose)
     NT requires 16 MB memory.
     NT requires almost 100 MB hard disk space.

Are you saying all of these are true?

     - Mike

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.networking