From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! :)
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 17:49:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.090703.7310@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>
>The long list of things I may find myself doing on any given day includes
>selling PC's to Joe Lunchbox.
> 
>Most Joe's want software that they know. They have used it at work. Having
>discovered how useful it can be, they now want to use it at home. The kids
>want to play games, too.
>
>These folks buy on price. They know little about computers. This PC will
>likely have to last them 5 years or more......They often find computers
>vaguely intimidating. 
> 
>Of the half dozen customers I spoke to this afternoon *none* wanted Windows.
>They wanted DOS, WordPerfect 5.1, or maybe PFS:Works ( a nice, cheap,
>integrated package for the home user....). Oh yeah....and some games.

Quite right.  Here in the U.S., you can get MLP's for DOS, for Windows, or
for DOS+Windows.  Many places in San Diego put DOS on every machine...
and (it would appear), this type of machine is well-suited for your clients.

> 
>These people don't want OS/2 either. I don't even bother to mention it. 
> 

Which is what I've discovered, too.  A dealer I know of has sold only 3
OS/2 packages in five months...

>But....the other category of user is the person on the cutting edge. The guys
>who are on the look-out all the time for something good, special. 
> 
>These guys don't show any interest in OS/2 in our shop. Why should they? They
>have it on their machines at home already. What they want now are the
>applications to run on it. 

Which, unfortunately, there are dreadfully few of.  I think this is where
the argument regarding MLPs and volume discounts is coming from... the
OS/2 advocates are incensed by the fact that their OS of choice is not
as popular as it could be... and maybe blame MS because their marketing
strategy appears to be far more effective than IBM's.

> 
>I'm selling a few of those these days. On any given day, I now spend about 20%
>of my time answering OS/2 queries.
> 

Really?  Which packages?  Almost all of my major clients have looked at
OS/2 (some have tried it) and at last count, 99% have rejected it.  Lack of
applications, lack of iron (ie. too slow), lack of stability (most, IMHO
were OE's), etc.

>Bundles? We had the compulsory MS bundles for a while. But MS couldn't supply
>to goods in sufficient quantities, so we dropped that. But many of those users
>got Windows and never used it. Or deleted it to gain space for Wordperfect 5.1
>and the kids games.

That's funny.  I rejected the agreement for the opposite reason.  I felt that
it was too restrictive--and that my sales volume didn't make the 
restriction profitable.

I want to point out to any readers out there, that Steve actually HAD
to bundle MS software--and he "dropped that."  I would also like to point
out that there was no "gun to his head" to stay on.  He found it wasn't
profitable to abide by the agreement and decided it wasn't worth it.

So enough of this whining about MS "forcing" vendors to ship DOS or Windows
(or both) with their systems.

> 
>Steve
>
> 
>-- 
>Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | On Sept. 19th, 88% of NZ voters opted
>Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         | for proportional representation. It
>+64 4 478 4714                          | looks like we may get a more  
>**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       | democratic system "real soon now".


Joe
My opinions.