From: SXMRP@orca.alaska.edu (Michael R. Platzke)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: superVGA  (and misc top-blowing)
Date: 16 Aug 92 00:17:44 GMT
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network

In article <1992Aug14.180232.5852@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
>Subject: Re: superVGA  (and misc top-blowing)
>Date: 14 Aug 92 18:02:32 GMT

>In article <SXMRP.13.0@orca.alaska.edu> SXMRP@orca.alaska.edu (Michael R. Platzke) writes:
>>Come on, every indication is that NT will be available in early 93.  Or maybe
>>they could release a beta version in December of 92 without DOS or Windows
>>16 or OS/2 1.3 support and just sell it as an LA release.  Then they could
>>promise to have OS/2 2.0 support out in a month or two and delay it until 
>>September.  :-o

>....

>>Remember, you were looking at a pre-beta release

>So, when will the beta come out?

I don't know.  The point I was trying to make was that it was the version
that was demo'd was pre-beta and it would be reasonable to expect that the
beta and final versions would be faster, thats all.

>You said that there is 'every
>indication" that NT will be available in "early '93".

Yeah, open mouth, insert foot.  I have gotten much response from this and
reget saying it.  I still believe that NT will appear in early 93, but I
certainly have no facts or source to back this up.

>I should hope
>that they have all the features in beta form real soon or they're
>going to end up releaseing a strip down form as an "LA" release.

As long as it as win-16 and win-32 support I would be happy.  Most of the
apps I use now are win-16.  MS will have to race to get it done, though.

>Just to counter a few implications above:  IBM's LA release was not a
>stripped down version.  It had every feature but seamless Windows.
>And IBM never promised seamless Windows for the initial release.  On
>the other hand, NT supporters here have been asserting (repeatedly,
>with increasing fury) that NT will be available in its complete form
>by the end of December (or January).

Sorry if came across as an NT biggot and offended anyone.  I try to remain
fairly levelheaded, but I've been known to talk first and think later, on
rare occasions.  I still think that IBM released a premature product.  Please
correct me if I'm wrong, but it did not also ship with the netware requester
available, the 32 bit graphical interface.  Also, I read in PC Week (yeah, I
know its not exactly the end source of truth) that IBM was working on the
code up until the last day.  Combined with the fact that it took them a while
to fill up the channel, it seems like a rushed product.

>Again, maybe they can pull this off.  I don't know.  I'm not MS.  But
>it doesn't seem likely from here.  Let's just wait and see.  If it
>doesn't ship on time, we can all have some fun at MS Marketing's
>expense.

Boy, would'nt that be unusual :-).  I agree on your point of waiting and
seeing.  Talk at this point is just that, talk (which I should'nt have done).

>-- 
>   |)  David Charlap           "I don't even represent myself
>  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
> ((|,)
>  ~|~  Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.

-Michael R. Platzke (sxmrp@orca.alaska.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy