From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:33:26 GMT

In article <wiegand.726347492@lido16> motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net writes:
>discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:
>
>[Stuff deleted]
>
>>Likewise, vendors are out there selling MSDOS and Windows because their
>>clients WANT MS-DOS and Windows. 
>
>This assumes all users are well informed and making intelligent choices.
>I would suggest that many users simply take whatever is offered by the
>computer maker without researching the alternatives. So to some extent
>the "demand" for MS-DOS is created by the dealers themselves.
>

Oh, so you would prefer that seamstresses and carpet sweepers "research"
their alternatives in a technical thing such as an operating system?
Nice thought, but unrealistic.  The "need" for MSDOS and Windows is generated
because of Applications... applications that may (or may not) run well
(or at all) under OS/2... on the machine configuration that the client
desires.

I just checked with three other vendors in my area... the typical system
they sell if a 486-33 with 4 megs of RAM.  RAM may be cheap, but clients
WOULD rather save themselves $120 off the cost of the system... and OS/2
does not run well in 4 megs of RAM.

Now, Microsoft has come up with a plan to offer MS-DOS and Windows for a
cheap price... but mind you, IBM can do the same.  

In short, it is NOT the dealers that create the "demand" for MS-DOS.  IT
is the desire for Microwave-oven-convenience.  Many buyers don't care
how a Microwave oven works, or whether or not it contains a Phillips
tube or a Goldstar tube--they care whether or not it will cook their
food.  Likewise, until OS/2 can boast the same SOFTWARE support (and
stability) as DOS+Windows, I doubt that people will be flocking to 
Egghead software to buy it.

Mind you, I've just seen OS/2 2.1... and I think that I'd be switching
soon (it does almost everything I want it to do, but wish to make sure
that it will be compatible with the software and applications and hardware
I use)--it's a great deal better than OS/2 2.0 was.

BTW--I know that OS/2 2.0 works pretty well with all the CSD and patches
and voodoo installed... but would you, as a vendor, trust that the
resulting system will bring customer satisfaction?


>> And because so many of them want it,
>>the vendors find it profitable to get the best deal they can on it.  This
>>leads to cheaper prices for the vendor, cheaper prices for ALL of the 
>>clients, and bigger profits for the developer.  The only people that aren't
>>happy are a minority that can't get it through their heads that the 
>>resulting price of the system is usually CHEAPER than if the vendor never
>>signed the agreement.
>
>I don't see why this would lead to cheaper prices for everyone.
>That's a big statement to make without some proof.

I cannot offer anything but my own experience as a vendor (since every
vendor conducts business with his clients and his suppliers in 
different ways).

I am a vendor--yes, I actually sell hardware and peripherals.  I KNOW
how volume can actually lower the overall price of the systems.  One
distributor I have offered a system that was comparable to one I was
already using (same mother board and case design)--but with a multi I/O
card that I didn't want.  But since the extended price of the system
+cost of my DESIRED card (from another distributor) was LESS than the
system I had been using before, I bought it (and now have a bunch of
unused multi-I/O cards from clients who didn't want 'em).

Now, did I lower the cost of the system to my clients?  Sure did.  Did I
offer an even lower cost to those who didn't like the supplied multi-I/O
card (I explained my reservations about it... namely gameport compatibility)?
Of course not--but I gave them a good deal on the correct card (my cost).
Is this immoral?  No: I am offering the same system at a much reduced 
cost than before... and I am making money.  And since my price is 
better than other vendors in my field (insurance industry), my volume has
picked up and....
.... I can get even a BETTER price on the system because of the increased
volume (I used to buy systems at QTY 2.  Now I buy them at QTY 6).

The Microsoft Plan?  I reviewed the MLP, and turned it down.  I have not
felt any repercussions from the (ahem) "force" that Microsoft is
exerting on me.


>
>-- 
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Robert Wiegand - Motorola Inc.
>motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net            uunet!motcid!wiegand
>Disclamer: I didn't do it - I was somewhere else at the time.

Sorry I couldn't provide real proof.

Joe.
My opinions only.

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy