From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: NSTL compares OS/2 2.0 and Windows 3.1
Date: 6 Oct 92 18:57:41 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Oct1.051133.5806@fcom.cc.utah.edu>, brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Br
ian Sturgill) writes:
>
>From a Microsoft press release:
>NSTL Rates Windows 3.1 as "Platform of Choice"
>       National Software Testing Labs (NSTL) determined that
>the Microsoft  Windows operating system version 3.1 is the
>"Platform of Choice to Run Today's Applications" in a thorough
>head-to-head evaluation against OS/2* 2.0, published in Software
>Digest* Ratings Report by NSTL (August 1992, Vol. 9, No. 4).  In
>an independent evaluation of both products, NSTL tested more
>than 100 PC hardware systems and ran more than 680 performance
>tests to reach its conclusion.
>       NSTL's overall rating was based on three major criteria:
>performance,  hardware compatibility and usability.  NSTL
>measured performance based on common user activities such as
>printing, scrolling and memory tasks.  Microsoft Windows 3.1 was
>found to outpace OS/2 in performance when running single tasks
>with Windows-based applications.  Microsoft Windows also
>performed almost every task more quickly than OS/2 whether the
>tester rebooted before the benchmark or reran the test.  In the
>Windows-based application multitasking trials, NSTL found that
>Microsoft Windows' multitasking capabilities outperformed OS/2's
>when running more than one task at a time.
>       Windows ran without any problems on all but one of 102
>hardware systems tested, while OS/2 had problems ranging from
>minor complications to outright incompatibility on 25 systems
>tested.  In the usability category, Windows was found to be easier
>to learn because of the familiar interface of the many Windows-
>based programs on the market today.  NSTL said that the revamped
>OS/2 interface added to users' learning curve.  NSTL also
>determined that Windows was easier to install and had superior
>documentation.


Couple of points.  First, I find it a little suspicious that on the
Multitasking it out performed OS/2.  I'm curious as to what the tests
involved, but maybe that could be a legitamite result depending on the tests.
I will point out that the new beta is considerably faster and this obviously
was not taken into account.  Second, I notice no tests with respect to DOS
performance.  This too is very important because there are a non trivial
number of DOS apps out there.  Third, their comments on the interface shoots
themselves in the foot.  What they said in a nutshell is that the testers were
already familiar with windows and so they didn't need to learn anything.  Well
no kidding.  Anytime you haven't seen an interface before, you are going to
have something of a learning curve.  That sort of casts a shadow on the rest
of what is stated because of its sheer stupidity.



    For information on obtaining a copy of the report, contact
>Meryl Stern at NSTL, (215) 941-9600 ext. 410.
>
>Brian
>--
>C. Brian Sturgill                I strongly encourage you to read Ross Perot's
>University of Utah                             United We Stand
>Center for Software Science             How we can take back our country.
>brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373  (It's more important than OS/2 vs NT! :-))
>

-- 
Stacy John Behrens
*===)-------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware