From: mhuth@byron.u.washington.edu (Mark Huth)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tidbits about NT and OS/2 from the trade rags.
Date: 5 Oct 92 23:54:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct5.235450.23451
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <7493@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.030508.5441@u.washington.edu> mhuth@byron.u.washington.edu (Mark Huth) writes:
>If you put it in the OS, it may cost _you_ less, but it costs me more, since
>I'm now paying for a feature I'm not going to use. Should I be forced to
>subsidize your network just to get a particular OS? An add-on can be just as
>well integrated into the system as a feature that's there by default; that's a
>minor issue. (BTW, how isn't IBM's TCP/IP for OS/2 a nwetworking package? An
>iumplementation of TCP/IP is, by definition, a networking package.) Any cost
>for a feature that's of no use to me is too much.

I'd argue that your view is very shortsighted.
>
>Maybe networking is going to be important. I'd like to see the Internet come
>into my house. I also admit that I'm significantly atypical in my computing
>usage. The average computer user outside of academia is _not_ interested in
>networking. Look at DESQview/X: They got loud screams about their choice of a
>non-TCP/IP network transport to be included with the package, but
>substantially all of that screaming came from academic users. Once you spend
>some time in the real world, your opinion might change as well.

Jay, the danger in making the kind of assumption you make in the above 
paragraph is that you haven't a clue if I've spent any time in the real world
(I have, years with a mainframe vendor and more years as a database consultant)
Additionally, you run the risk of being accused of not knowing what you are 
talking about.  Why, when I worked installing banking systems for interbank
payments, I used networks for business.  the 
>
>>me any more than the $69 I've already spent.  
>
>Oh, but the general public can't depend on that; after all, it's purely for
>developers.
>
>Your $69 argument is a red herring. We (or at least I) am talking about
>shippable, usable, production code. The real-world product will be almost
>certainly between $490 and $500, based on MS's own statements.

Lets see what it costs, when a price is established.  
>
>>Jay, again.  Will's employers have said, publically, that they didn't pressure
>>Will.  Microsoft has said that they didn't pressure Will.
>
>You haven't answered my question. What does Will have to gain by making the
>story up? Both Ziff-Davis and MS have something to gain by lying about
>pressuring Zachmann, ZD a recovery of their supposedly impartial image, and MS
>relief from their increasingly sleazeball image.
>
Gosh, Jay.  I don't know.  Perhaps IBM has bribed Will?  Perhaps Will is going
to go to work for a competitor?  Perhaps Will has a persecution complex?  
Perhaps Will is dishonest?  Perhaps Will's perception of what happened is just
plain wrong?  It would be foolish of me to claim to understand Will.  Just 
because he  


>>Thousands of other
>>people work in the same industry in which Will works. Dozens of them write 
>>columns.  Will suggests that he's the only one who is honest and isn't bending
>>to pressure from Microsoft.  I find that absurd.  Do you think that everyone
>>in the trade press is on the take?
>
>No, but I do believe that the other columnists are either honest MS bigots or
>bowing to MS pressure. There's no doubt that MS can make it hard on someone
>who doesn't toe the party line.
>>I don't know what Will's motives are, maybe he believes his accusations.  
>>You, of course, will believe what you choose to believe.  I'll believe in your
>>signature....(grin)
>
>I do believe in my .signature. Microsoft's actions are not explainable by
>stupidity.
I thought we were talking about Will Zachman?

>-- 
>Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
>jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
>    Vote for a REAL change on 3 November: Throw out the check-bouncing,
>  tax-and-spend Democrat Congress! (obviously, not an opinion of UTHSCH)


-- 
Mark Huth                         * Is it too wild to want to get into 
Mhuth@u.washington.edu            * Space someday?
Compuserve 70346,563              *
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy