From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: My impression of NT Beta. . .
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 01:17:15 GMT

In article <4f4I4f200iUx85n34O@andrew.cmu.edu> Carl B Jabido <cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>NT is the ultimate Unix killer!  NOT!!!!  Currently, the beta running in
>8 megs is a real DOG.  Worse than OS/2 in fact.  Imagine speedy File


	You are doing something much worse than spreading FUD, you
	are reviewing a product based on the beta (really, the current
	NT beta would better be termed "late alpha"--even according
	to MS) release.

	Did you ever see the OS/2 2.0 beta?  (Not the current one--the
	_2.0_ beta)

	The WPS used to crash sometimes if you double clicked too 
	rapidly, or if you grabbed a window and swung it around 
	the screen for awhile (first you'd start seeing windowbar
	trails, and then the screen was toast).  It was insane.  I
	had a friend who, for awhile, couldn't keep his system running
	more than three minutes because there was a _typo_ in his 
	config.sys file!  <And he also had another problem, that was the
	reboot loop that he got into, because he left a program that
	was restarted every boot that crashed the system and reboot it...>

	The OS/2 2.0 betas (especially when the WPS was first around) 
	were downright _awful_  <Hell, I can run Populous and trash the
	OS/2 +SP system _now_--it wont crash, but the display is toast
	if you try and run it in a window>.  So don't pull this NT
	beta review stuff, because I've got your windows in my slingshot
	sights.



>SLOW here folks.  And, that was with a 25-30 meg swap file!  That's



	This sounds pretty awful, but I assume 8 megs is the recommended
	medium, and therefor your review is about as accurate as 
	someone who chooses to review Os/2 2.0 with 4 megs.



>more.  First, the Program Manager/File Manager setup.  That is a real
>unintuitive setup.  OS/2 object-orientedness is so much better.  In


	Affirm, but I think the WPS is still too clutzy/clunky. 
	Slick, but it needs a _lot_ of work.  A _lot_.



>fact, I've decided that if OS/2 fails (ie, no software, etc) I'm gonna
>go to NeXTStep 486 first, then if that doesn't work, I'll scrap my PC


	If I could afford the system to run it and the cost of
	NS486 itself (~$800+ when it comes out) I would choose 
	NS over OS/2 for a lot of reasons.  

	How many people want to bet that NS486 _1.0_ is a hell 
	of a lot more durable than OS/2, win3.1 and NT combined?
	<Well, maybe not NT--we wouldn't want to hurt the home
	team..>

	

>and buy a Mac and A/UX.  That's right, no more Micro$oft OS's for me.


	I like A/UX, but I don't particularly like the Mac.  (I was
	weaned on CP/M and HDOS <heath> on an H8--I _like_ command
	lines for most things..) 

	Speaking of which, I know it must--but does NT even have one?
	



>So, my conclusions about that example are that Dos emulation is NOT up
>to par with real Dos or OS/2's Dos.  Mouse tracking really sucked, and
>full-screen wasn't working.  But, it seems that NT will be a stable
>system.


	OS/2's dos support wasn't so hot before the beta program 
	got underway either.  Hell, it's _still_ not up to par
	with real DOS [probably wont ever be, and I don't expect it
	to be--but you mentioned it].  

	I like OS/2.  I liked it at 1.0--[well... 1.3 was when I 
	was first willing to _use_ it.. But I respected 1.0]--
	something an Amiga user can put up with and so on.  AND
	I admit to a personal bias against MS [I run DRDOS/OS2 
	here, but alas--I use win31/drdos most of the time]
	but if NT fufills it's design (it apparently has a _long_
	way to go from your message) than I will probably move to it
	for my next OS (if NS486 doesn't get cheap) because OS/2
	may be _respected_ but it's sure as hell not supported. 

	Anyone want an honor bet on this--within one (1) month
	of NT shipping there will be at least 5 heavy-duty applications 
	(for _nt_ not just Win32) and up-to-date drivers for ATI,
	Diamond, S3, NCR, Western Digital, etc.. cards.

	Plus, I'm willing to bet that NT will install _out_of_the_box_
	on machines that OS/2 seems to barf on.  

	Even further, I'd be willing to bet that vendors like
	Dell, Gateway and Zeos start shipping their upper-end
	systems with NT pre-installed and configured.  Well, maybe
	not Dell, since I understand (can anyone confirm or deny thi?) 
	that they have a deal with NeXT.

	Want OS/2 to succeed?  (I do)  

	Buy OS/2 products, but don't buy the crap.  I.e. Don't buy
	WP for os/2 because it's garbage next to the DOS and Windows
	versions, and for all their "we're making 6.0 on os/2 first" 
	Wordperfect has announced the DOS and Windows versions will be
	released in 1q93 and that the OS/2 version will be "much later"...

	Plus, don't buy the crap that is put together using the 
	WinAPI-to-OS/2 mirror deal, either.
-- 
 Robert Stephen Rodgers  ||  rsrodger@wam.umd.edu  || IRC: Yamanari
 --------NeXTmail-preferred!!--------------------------------------
 Snout: O Bottom, thou art chang'd!  What do I see on thee?          
 Bottom: What do you see?  You see an ass-head of your own, do you?  
From: Bertram.Moshier@f115.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com (Bertram Moshier)
Sender: FredGate@tdkt.kksys.com