From: toddf@eng.umd.edu (Todd Fine)
Subject: Why Windows is a better bet than OS/2 2.0...
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 20:16:37 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park, College of Engineering
Distribution: usa
Originator: toddf@coke.eng.umd.edu


A lot of people have asked questions about the differences between OS/2 2.0
and the coming Windows NT system. I just came across a column in the 
Washington Post Business section dealing a bit with this issue. I, too, 
have been asking myself which way to go (i.e., with MS Windows or OS/2),
and have made the decision to stick with Windows. Some of the reasons why
will become clear below...

*********** Excerpt from Washington Post Business section ************

	...Meanwhile, Microsoft Corp. shipped Windows 3.1 this week. It's
	more of a stalking horse for a trio of Microsoft products coming
	at the end of the year than it is a direct competitor for OS/2 2.0
	  The most important of those new products will be Windows NT, for
	new technology, a full 32-bit operating system that will offer
	important features missing in the new OS/2, said David Thacher,
	Microsoft's group product manager for Windows NT. Where OS/2 2.0 
	has a high-performance file system capable of long 254-character
	file names, Windows NT will have yet a more advanced file system,
	with multiple long file names for a single file, self-reparing of
	damaged files and the ability to address much greater disk storage
	space than OS/@ 2.0, Thacher said.
	   OS/2 2.0 can address memory and storage using 32 bits, compared
	with 16 for DOS and Windows 3.1. But Windows NT can address with
	64 bits, giving it access to 4 gigabytes of random access memory,
	eight times more than Windows 2.0.
	  The coming Windows NT also has full government-specified
	security levels built in and it can utilize multiple multi-processors.
	OS/2 2.0 lacks the security features and is limited to a single
	processor. 
	   A 32-bit version of Windows for 386 and higher microprocessors is
	planned, to be positioned between Windows 3.1 and Windows NT. There
	is also a 32-bit version of MS-DOS in the wings, Thacher said.
	   The strength of this lineup is that most of the same copies of
	Windows programs, now and in the future, will run on any of the
	versions...

************************** End excerpt *********************************

Some final comments:  OS/2 2.0 is a great product. I've ordered it myself,
along with Windows 3.1. OS/2 2.0 has a lot to offer, but, in my opinion
(repeat, *MY* opinion), it's only benefit over the Windows line is that
it is "here right now". 

With Microsoft's long term strategic plans for multi-platform Windows
development, along with it's different versions of Windows for high-end
vs low-end markets, along with it's parallel plans for DOS 6.0 and up,
along with it's superior marketing abilities, along with the huge
momentum and customer base for Windows programs (and DOS, too),
I think that Windows is the way to go, the way of the future.

Again, this is my opinion only, and I am not trying to put down OS/2 2.0.
In fact, I've been *very* impressed with IBM's effort and results with
this product; I just don't believe that they can keep up with Bill Gates
and his plans for Microsoft and Windows...

Good luck,

		Todd Fine
		toddf@eng.umd.edu

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	"He was not certain he could ever have all of what he wanted,
	 yet he had to proceed as if it were possible.
		--Juxtaposition, Piers Anthony

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~