From: brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Why I have trouble with the c.o.o.a view of Microsoft.
Date: 16 Oct 92 06:20:29 GMT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
Originator: brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu



Recently several people on this group have been giving me grief with
regard to my criticism of IBM's WorkSet/2.  They point to old stories
about MSC 6.0, and while I have no doubt those stories are true, I'd
like to pass on an example of why I'm convinced that Microsoft is
now different.

Here are some excerpts from a mailing I received from Microsoft a couple
of days ago.  The mailing was unsolicited (I assume they sent it to
all registered users).  It contained 3 diskettes: 2 patch diskettes and
a diskette that contains a full version of a C/C++ Browser and a trial
version of Microsoft Test. (Typos in the letter are probably mine.)

	Dear Microsoft C/C++ Developer:

	This package is our way of welcoming you to the expanding
	community of Microsoft C/C++ version 7.0 users.  We value
	your patronage and genuinely hope that you are finding
	our product useful. I'm sure you can tell that we put a
	lot of effort into this technology.  Even though C/C++
	took a little longer than we wanted, we're proud of it,
	and appreciatve of its broad acceptance around the
	world--over 125,000 copies have been shipped in the first
	few months!

	We want to help you get the most of our Microsoft C/C++.
	To that end, we're including a patch disk that will clean
	up problems in your current version of Microsoft C/C++. A
	complete list of the patches, and the problems they
	correct, is in the PATCH.TXT file on the disk. This patch
	disk upgrades your current C/C++ installation to the new
	7.0a release of Micrsoft C/C++. From now on, we'll be
	working harder to keep you up to date on our bugs,
	patches, and workarounds, and this patch disk is just a
	down payment on that promise.  We'll be keeping you up to
	date with regular bug list postings in our CompuServe
	forums as well.

	...

	In this package you'll also find a brief quesionnaire.
	Use it to let us know what you thinkg of Microsoft C/C++
	version 7.0--what you like, what you don't like, what
	you'd like to see changed, and most important, what you'd
	like to see included in future releases.  We're hard at
	work on new and improved versions, so your views really
	do count.

	We're committed to providing you with the support you
	need to create great applications with Microsoft C/C++.
	For assistance using our tools, we encourage you to take
	advantage of MSLANG forum on CompuServe, General
	assistance with Microsoft C/C++ is also available from
	our product support group at ...

	In particular, the developers who wrote the Microsoft
	Foundation Classes (MFC) are anxious to hear from you.
	They want to know about your experiences with their
	technology--what you're building, what problems and
	objectives you have, and what you'd like them to build
	next. Because they really want to hear from you, they
	made me promise to invite you to meet with them
	electronically up on CompuServe (...). If you prefer,
	e-mail them at MSAFX@microsoft.com, send a fax to ... or
	you can even write to ...

	...

	Jim McCarthy
	Directory of Marketing
	Development Tools Group


This letter is a single example of dozens I've seen from Microsoft at
and since the NT developers conference (July), where Microsoft:
1) Admits they're not perfect, but are trying hard to fix things.
2) WANTS you input... this is not fake marketing rhetoric, I really
	believe they mean it.
3) Provides free bug fixes.
I'm not sure when it started, as I had not paid attention until July.

People that brag about IBM's multitude of free bug fixes, have a
point, but when they start telling stories of being charged for MSC 6.0
bug fixes, those stories no longer fit reality. Further unlike
WorkSet/2, MSC 7.0 is a full featured product, including a
source profiler, and C++.  It is much better documented than WorkSet/2
and the technical documentation for Windows 3.1 is better and cheaper
than that provided for OS/2 2.0.  The version that comes with the
pre-release works well for a beta-level product.  The Windows
3.1 version can be purchased on CD-ROM, which is very convenient
installation-wise -- quite important if you do cross-platform work
where PC's might pull double or triple duty.

People in c.o.o.a that represent Microsoft as grasping, money-grubbing
scum that will sell you things and then drop you, should really take
another look.

A couple of months from now I'll be putting the same set of code I
have had so much trouble with under WorkSet/2, under 7.0 for NT.
It will be interesting to see whether or not the optimizer works
there. I'm not nearly as aprehensive, as MS C/C++ 7.0 for NT has
variable levels of optimization, I'll be surprised if some of the
levels don't work.
When I asked the Toronto compiler group about levels of optimization
for WorkSet/2, I was told that it did not have it as their testing
people felt it to be too hard to test that way.  All I know is
that multiple problems with the optimizer will force me to ship
with optimization totally off.  I have only two choices with
WorkSet/2, either turn on the optimization and hope I can
find all the bugs (which would likely delay shipment two months or more)
and I doubt seriously I would find them all, or turn optimization
off (CSet/2 is a reliable simple compiler).  In the end, us being
a small company, we really cannot afford the delay, and I fear the
bugs the optimizer would introduce would add greatly to our
maintenance overhead.  I doubt seriously if I'm the only OS/2
developer hitting this problem.  I hope that at the upcoming
developers conference a poll will be taken to determine whether or not
this problem is widespread.  The code base I am porting is not what
I'd call standard, so it's possible I'm just unlucky.  Better yet
a letter sent similar to the Microsoft one above, containing a survey
for the users of WorkSet/2, and asking about the optimizer specifically
would be even better.

Well, don't expect to see many more posts from me for a while, I'm
off (Sunday) to the OS/2 developers conference in NYC.
I'll post a trip report when I get back... IBM seems to be moving as
fast as possible to improve their developer situation, I'm not
sure what to expect.  It's the first time in months I've looked
forward to an encounter with IBM,  but I'm afraid to hope.

I hope things don't get boring while I'm gone!  :-)
(Hmm... maybe it would be better if it were, less messages to catch up on!)

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! :-))
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy