From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Subject: Re: Windows vs. OS/2
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:48:27 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.031320.20209@itsmail1.hamilton.edu> jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.165329.5878@nosc.mil> discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:
>>I've been thinking about all these arguments about which OS is "better" 
>>(indeed whether Windows could be considered an OS or not).  So I thought that
>>if there were people out there who could put up or shut up, I thought that
>>perhaps we could begin to put the issue at rest.
>>
>>So what I propose is that we get some volunteers from both the Windows and
>>OS/2 camps to each do a "project"--for example, laying out the cover of a
>>published magazine (say, the Nov 10,1992 issue of PC Magazine)--each 
>>using his/her favorite operating platform, using their favorite software
>>that runs under their favorite OS.   When they get finished, they upload
>>it to a judging site (to be determined) where other volunteers view their
>>work.  Then each designer basically tells us *how* they did it, and how
>>*long* it took them to do it--we give more points for the first one
>>submitted.
>>
>While I'm sympathetic to the idea that motivates this proposal, I think
>it's nonetheless flawed.  Assuming for the moment that one already had
>the necessary graphics images in some convertible format (tif, bmp, pcx,
>cgm, eps, whatever), an experienced user of WordPerfect for DOS 5.x
>could do it.  I think the test says less about an OS than it does about
>the programs chosen and the skill levels of their users.  

Of course, but we could make a rule that says "you must remain in the
respective environment."  Meaning:  You can run DOS in a window, but you
can't "exit to DOS" to run a DOS program (although some may construe that
since DOS is *part* of Windows 3.1, they should be allowed to do this).

If they want to use WordPerfect for DOS 5.x, they can--they just have to
try to work it from within their respective OS's.

I think that to ensure fairness, the contestents should have similar
hardware setups: for example, the same type of CPU, a scanner, etc.  
I understand that a proper system could cost $$$.  But, I am sure that if
we look hard enough we could find a Windows 3.1 expert that has a "proper"
system... and an OS/2 expert that also has the correct system.  [On the
other hand... maybe the hardware/software is not supported by OS/2 yet?]

And yes, it does test the skill levels of the users.  But that is why we
find people who think they are experts in their operating environment.  I
once thought that publisher's paintbrush was an adequate tool to do
presentation slides with... until I actually tried to do it against someone
using Corel Draw...  Needless to say, I now use Corel Draw (and am now
looking seriously at more specialized software).

The "skill" of a user, considering that they have already reached (at least
in their own mind) a plateau of "expert" has a lot to do with the operating
environment.  For example, a person "expert" in DOS would be hard put to
do professional layouts (even with Wordperfect)... but a person using
a GUI system has a much easier time learning how to do it...

>
>OTOH, do we really want to deny ourselves of the great charm in this
>"tastes great/less filling" OS argument?  :)  What else would we do
>without it?   Work?  (Hah!)
>
>Joe
>jmalloy@hamilton.edu
>>
>
>


Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy