From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Good news for 2.0 and other Tidbits.
Date: 01 Oct 92 19:05:28 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Sep30.210022.2904@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Sep29.180844.4739@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>

     I'm deleted a godawful amount of context here to save some
bandwidth - if you need to read it, go back and find the old article.

>>     You didn't use an example - you made a statement.  "OS/2 is a
>>totally different story.  Once you install it, you use it."  Your
>>statement has been proven false by counterexample.  Why are you
>>having a hard time understanding that?
>
>Actually no, Phil, the example given DOESN'T disprove the statement.
>Note that the example give states that they "ALMOST never use it"
>[emphasis mine], not that they NEVER use it.  Hence it was installed
>and they do use it.  The only way the statement can be false is if the
>person who installs it simply doesn't use the entire machine or else
>is sufficiently clueless to ENJOY wasting large amounts of diskspace
>for something they never use.  Note that it says INSTALLED ON THEIR
>MACHINE, not merely purchased.

     OK, if you're up for some hardcore quibbling:

     Installed doesn't necessarily mean "currently installed."  It
could mean "was installed and has been deleted."  The original
statement doesn't preclude using that definition.
     Way back when this thread started, though, the basic argument
(and I'm paraphrasing) was "Every copy of OS/2 is in use, but every
copy of Windows isn't".  The second part I believe is correct - the
first is far less likely.


>>     Please demonstrate to me a single post written by myself which
>>is "pure FUD".
>
>Please DEFINE "pure FUD" (as opposed to 'impure FUD', I suppose).

      I don't know - it wasn't my phrase originally.


>[In other words, this "show evidence" line is getting REAL old --
>personally, I have better things to do than hunt back through all your
>old postings (or anyone elses), Phil, even if I found them worthwhile
>enough to keep around.  If YOU have time to engage in this sort of
>exercise, it sounds to me like you don't have enough to do.

      If a person is going to make an argument, and _especially_
if they are going to tell me what _I_ have done, they had better
have some evidence to back up their position.  You didn't make
the FUD claim, so the burden of proof isn't on you.  You don't
need to go back and read old posts.  You don't need to do anything.


>>     You can win an argument by presenting counter-evidence to
>>contradict a claim.  Wolfgang's evidence was anecdotal, but still
>>quite believable.  Are you seriously suggesting that he was lying?
>
>Well, I'm seriously suggesting that it doesn't constitute the
>counter-proof of the original statement that you say it does, so
>there's no need to suggest he was lying.

      It depends on definition and context.


>>     Wolfgang never made the claim that every copy of Windows sold
>>was being used.  You, however, did make a similar claim about OS/2.
>>He proved your statement false, but made no counterclaim.  Therefore,
>>he has made no statement that you could prove wrong.
>
>Not in what I read, he didn't (although it was probalby his intent).
>The quote that it is claimed that Wolfgang refuted is that people use
>OS/2 AFTER IT IS INSTALLED ON THEIR MACHINES.

     The context is gone - you should have gotten into this thread
a bit earlier, before so much got deleted.


>  This is sort of
>tautological, since once you install the operating system on a
>machine, you either use it or you don't use the machine.

     Not true, as you prove by your own words below:


>  Of course,
>there are things like 'dual boot' and such,  but this seems like a lot
>of trouble to go to in order to NOT use an operating system.

     Dual boot is fairly useful.  I have a machine that dual boots
DOS and Windows NT.  Can you guess which one I use and which one
sits idle on the hard drive?

					-Phil
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy