From: jarober@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (DE Robertson james an 410-740-9172)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Origins of IBM / Microsoft rift
Date: 31 Jul 92 11:58:53 GMT
Organization: Johns Hopkins University

soh3@quads.uchicago.edu (min-woong sohn) writes:


>1) Users' point of view is different from what you say is true. 
>OS/2 users do not want to run windows applications in either seamless
>or in full screen windows.  It is costly in terms of using system resources
>like memory and cpu (You have to run DOS+Windows and then the app in addition
>to os/2).  If they had comparable or better native
>apps for os/2, they wouldn't run windows apps.  In a sense, Windows
>emulation is a ***necessary evil*** for a lot of users.  In time, people will
>start to buy os/2 apps and dump their old windows apps for various reasons.

	If OS/2 apps become available.  For all the talk, the trade rags I read
indicate the Borland and Lotus will be SLOW to release OS/2 versions of
their main apps - the Windows versions are bigger money makers, plain and 
simple.
	You make the 'great net mistake' here as well.  Most users are
not terribly technical.  Most users do not download in one window,
compile in a second, run a WP in a 3rd, and play a game in a fourth.  They
run one, and only one app at a time.  For this crowd, OS/2 and
Windows are equal in that they act as DOS shells.  They don't CARE
what OS they run - the MIS department makes that decision for them.  Sure,
users are getting more sophisticated, but from my experience in
consulting, the above holds pretty true.  

	Most of the fanatics (OS/2 or Windows) in this forum are
programmers and techie nerds (I'll fess up to being one myself...)
I happen to prefer A nice Sparc station to either Windows or OS/2, but 
that's neither here nor there - We can argue over fine points all we
want, but the users don't care.

	They want a simple system - PIF files are enough of a pain - The 
OS/2 methodology of tweaking non-OS/2 apps is WAY too much effort for the
average stiff who just wants to run his dams app.  Not everyone has
true blue equipment, and OS/2 is not easy to load on clones - Dos/Windows
is far simpler to load.  Again, the average stiff does NOT have the patience
that a tech guy does.  

	IMHO, OS/2 2.0 is Beta software - nice, but released too early.
In this regard, Windows 3.0 was also Beta, with 3.1 being somewhat
ready for prime time.  Until IBM make OS/2 a <LOT> easier to load and
a <LOT> easier to tyweak, it will remain a niche OS.

Jim Robertson
jarober@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu

>In other words, os/2 users will buy os/2 apps not windows apps.  I think
>if you use os/2 consistently for two months, then you'll naturally
>think the way I do.  For example, there are two clock that come with os/2.
>One is a windows applet and the other os/2 native applet.  I personally 
>prefer os/2 applet but even someone who think windows applet looks much better
>wouldn't have it running after a couple of trials.  **It slows down the
>system in a very annoying way.** 
>On the other hand, the os/2 clock just sits at a corner of your 
>screen all the time without slowing down your system in any obvious way.
>You're statement that Widnows apps are running all to well on os/2 is
>certainly true, but it is not an appropriate nor a compelling reason 
>for not developing for os/2. In a simple enough terms, 
>developing for windows is one thing and developing for os/2 is 
>an entirely different matter. From the users' point of view.  
>And a lot of developers seem to appreciate this fact.  

>2) You're missing/ignoring the developers' viewpoint also.  
>They would surely do some extra  work if that is likely to make them a
>lot of money.  I believe once a Windows app is written, 
>it is relatively a short step from there to a full-fledged os/2 apps.  
>IBM will even release (or has it already done so?) migration
>toolkit that will help developers to migrate their apps to os/2.  On the
>other hand, there are MS competitors.  They're tough and want to win the
>competition with MS.  They are WordPerfect in wordprocessor market, Lotus
>in spreadsheet market, and Borland in language market.  All three are
>top notched developers and they are tough competitors at that.  All three
>are developing for os/2 for obvious reasons.  They think a headstart in
>the os/2 market will only help them in their competition with MS for
>their respective product niches.  Your assertion will only be true
>for those developers who cannot invest to the development of apps for
>os/2 and windows at the same time due to financial or many other reasons.
>But they are hardly likely to be a major factor in this state of affairs.


>I hope this provides you with some food for thought :)

>Min
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy