From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: NT Destined to Succeed??
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 20:54:57 GMT

In article <19189@mindlink.bc.ca> Ian_Upright@mindlink.bc.ca (Ian Upright) writes:
>At times I didn't, and with all of NT's supposed capability, and Microsoft's
>marketing, I thought it could actually be a success.. NOT!


	That has to be the most irritating trendoid addition to the
	English language.

	[I'm referring to the ...NOT!.. In any case, pre-apologies for
	spacing and "c" dropouts--my keyboard is breaking, slowly]


>Here's why:
>Why do so called UNIX OS's (in our terms) fail?  Because lack of a user
>base..  


	Because UNIX, until NeXTStep, was impossible for the 
	average user to install, setup and maintain.  Because until
	recently, only a miniscule number of users had the equipment
	to run UNIX with any kindof real performance.  Because, until
	recently, UNIX was extremely expensive and mostly text-ugly
	in terms of interface.  Finally, UNIX has/had very few
	end user apps, and none of these are shrinkwrapped and sold
	at the local software store.



>And because the user base is so low, the prices must be higher.


	The price of UNIX is high for a number of reasons.

	Many of the licensing costs do not apply to Windows NT.



>Windows NT will not be affordable by most people.. (especially due to
>hardware requirements as well, but the software price is a big difference
>too..  


	The hardware requirements for NT do not appear to be that 
	much different from those for OS/2. There is, simply, a 
	different bottom line.  Many OS/2 users have nice, fast
	16 meg systems and harddisk storage for most users who
	NT/OS2 are targeted at is plentiful.



>Businesses today aren't willing to invest big bucks into software
>anymore.  They now know things are changing, and getting better.. Why
>spend a grand on software, when in 3 years something better and cheaper
>comes out... We see the market taking aim to $99 software packages now..
>Software *is* getting cheaper.. )


	I'm not sure how any ofthe above applies to NT.  NS486 will 
	likely price itself out of any kind of mass userbase, but NT 
	WILL cost below $500.  SRP.  If you use other MS products
	as measuring rods, this means NT will probably sell for
	somewhere between $250 and $350, with substantial discounts
	for upgrades.  How many people paid $150 for OS/2?

	(Or $350 for MSWord).  MS is not stupid about marketing. 



>Windows NT will not be compatable, and will even have worse compatabilities
>than OS/2, thus driving the NT user base down even more..


	Capability-wise, NT is equal to or greater than OS/2.  It offers
	things that OS/2 only offers when given some costly networking
	upgrade.  Most users don't need this stuff, though, so OS/2
	probably offers more bang for the buck.

	It also offers more bang for the buck in terms of performance,
	but OS/2 is hardly more solid than the NT beta.  (recent fud
	to the contrary inthis base on an obviously misconfigured
	machine, ignored).  If mission-critical is the goal, then
	NT or UNIX (preferably UNIX) are clearly superior to OS/2.

	Compatibility-wise, NT can't touch OS/2.  It's a matter of
	system integrity.


>There is a lot of anti-Microsoft love/hate relationships going around with
>Microsoft.  People are starting to see Microsoft as a company that looks
>out only for itself, and not for it's users..  


	Rather, not for it's competitors.



>There is a LOT of
>anti-windows feelings out there..   Many people hate windows, but only use
>it because there really wasn't a better alternative..  


	Many, many more people thing Win3.1 is the greatest thing
	sinced sliced bread and color television.  The can actually
	*use* their computer now, without havinhg to keep little
	crib-notes on things like how to change directories, delete
	or copy files, and so on.  

	The number of windows lovers, even to the greatest anti-MS
	fanatic, clearly overwhelms thesmall number of Windows
	haters, who are mostly using something other than Windows
	anyway. 



> Now there is..
>Thus driving the Windows and the NT user base down even more..


	I don't think so.  Win3.1 sells because it fills the 
	needs of the user.  Very few users have needs that OS/2
	fills that Win31 doesn't.  Most don't need anything more than
	primitive Windows-app multitasking and the ability to run Windows
	programs (or, switch briefly to a DOS ap).


>There is a lot of OS/2 advocacy out there..  If someone turned all those
>OS/2 advocacy quotes into bumper stickers, I'm sure they'd sell pretty
>fast..  Thus driving the NT user base down even more..


	There's a lot of Amiga advocacy, too.  As a principle, 
	the smaller the minority, the more vociferous.


>Software developers in general, allready have more acceptance for OS/2 now
>than they do NT..  It may have been different in the past, but I think if


	Nonsense.  NT support announcements and demoed apps far outweigh
	the non-vertical OS/2 population.



>A lot of good tools are coming out, or are out for OS/2 ( Digitalk,
>one of the leaders of Object Oriented programming has beefed up it's
>Smalltalk V product, and it is apparently fairly fast & efficient, as well
>as adding on other OS/2 specific development aids that aren't even available
>for any other platform!..)  The editor of Compuer Language even promotes


	NEXT.


>OS/2, and thinks it's the way of the future..  Recently, in a review of
>cross-platform development tools, many of the examples provided were
>snapshots of OS/2 screens of course..  Thats the OS that all the developers
>are seeking to develop for..  Thus driving the *software* base of NT down
>even more, thus driving the NT user base down even more..


	All of this, of course, goes against easily observable evidence.


>OS/2 has a 4 million user base, and there aren't really many native apps
>yet!   4 million people are looking into the future, sitting waiting for
>the native apps! 

	OS/2 sold 2 million morecopies since November?


> Once native apps hit the market, and driver support gets
>better, watch that number double or tripple very fast..  



	I've heard this one for the last 12 months. I still don't 
	have a decent driver for my ATI or Diamond cards, and the
	much-hyped "seamless windows" doesn't work with post-SP
	8514/a's.





> Windows user base
>isn't really going down, it's changing to OS/2..  Especially seeing as
>the hardware requirements are close to the same..  Except for hard drive
>space... Oh, and haven't you heard?  40 meg hard drives are selling like
>hot-cakes!  ;-)   People are just itching to put Dos, Win 3.1, and
>one Microsoft app on thier hard drive..


	Tha majority of users that *could* run OS/2 have 2-4 meg systems
	and a 40 to 60 megabyte HD.  For them, the upgrade to OS/2 is not
	much less than the upgrade to NT would be.

	And they have no real interest in either.  Win31 and DOs
	do their jobs fine,and if they're shorton space, something 
	like stacker helps that.



>The hard and the truth of it is:  With all these people *NOT* using NT,
>the software prices are going to be very high... Thus driving the user
>base even lower, thus driving the prices higher..  You get the picture?


	Nope.  Example:  OS/2 has a small user base.  Why isn't the price higher?


>*PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO BE USING NT FOR A DESKTOP PLATFORM IN THE FUTURE*


	People aren't going to be using OS/2, either.  They are, for 
	the most part, going to continue to use Win31 and DOS.


>Server platform maybe..  Shitty ugly looking high-end workstation *MAYBE*..
>Where's it headed?  Where is it's TARGET MARKET?  I don't even think
>Microsoft knows..  Personally, I think NeXTstep's got a better chance..


	NeXTStep is going to price itself into developer oblivion.  It's
	no mystery why the most up-to-date version of Improv is a Windows
	app and not a NeXT one (although, the NeXT version may recently
	have been updated).

	[delve into the dark reaches of madness deleted]


-- 
	Blaming "society" for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
         ---  boycott == censorship == closed mindedness == cowardice  ---
	      "Psalms 23:1  The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want."  
		Shepherds are for sheep.   -----      Pain teaches.