From: brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Subject: Re: Microsoft bashing (Well, not exactly....)
Date: 7 Sep 92 19:46:16 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

In article <1992Sep7.222632.242113@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> lbv2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (m.l. gore) writes:
>>Look at the fact that that was over a year ago.  Over a million copies of OS/2
>are out there
>>and the phones at IBM are ringing off the hook with vendors who want to develop
> for OS/2.

Gross exaggeration here... I know personally of several ISV's that have left
OS/2 for NT... I know of no vendor, except maybe Describe, that will not
be on NT too.  It's true many of the big players intend to be on both...
but then many of these are on Unix too... and we all know easy it is
to go and buy shrink-wrapped Unix apps!

Also, explain this.... OS/2 is out and according to some here "gaining
momentum".  The OS/2 developers conference is in October (I'll be there),
IBM is expecting 800.  NT's developers conference was in July and has started
the current round of interest in NT.  There were 4,600 attending.
I have many doubts about the level of ISV support for OS/2.

>>
>>How about PFS:Works for OS/2?
>>How about Micrografx Draw for OS/2?
>>How about Borland ObjectVision for OS/2?
>>How about all Lotus apps for OS/2?
>>How about Microsoft Mail for OS/2?
	On 32-bit OS/2?  Yeah, right, I believe this ;-)

>>
>>Mike Kaply
>>
>    One step further: How about everything for OS/2?
>
>    Seriously, there are well over a million copies out there, but it seems as
>    if nothing will get done until engough people continually bug and pressure
>    developers to balance winDoze developement with OS/2.

How many of that 1,000,000 do you think is in use?  My guess is less than half.

>
>    I am tired of reading about NT, and how 'great it is'. OK, fine its not
>    vaporware, but I don't have : a 486 processor
>                                  80 megs of so of disk space to kill
>                                  a CD rom drive

It runs just fine on my 386/33... I suspect it will even run on 386SX acceptably
but you'd need more memory (i.e. it's like OS/2, you can trade off
memory vs processor speed, as memory has a lot bigger effect on performance.)

>    But hey, those are just minor additions to my system that are practically
>    standard, right.

Well, maybe Windows 3.1 is right for you... what's your configuration? :-)
Get serious.... NT will not require 80 megs, or a 486, or a CD-ROM.
The released version of NT will likely take less space than a similarly
configured version of OS/2.  The reason is simple... NT currently does
not seem to need more room, and OS/2 has to support a Windows 3.1 environment
too.  (For example OS/2 has to have room for 2 copies of ATM fonts and
one copy of True Type fonts.)
I'm sorry that you don't have enough of a machine to run NT now in pre-beta,
but it's still pretty buggy, so you're probably happier where you are for
the moment.

>
>    Please...lets stay in the real world. Why waste time comparing the phantom
>    features of one OS with the real life features of another. If I was to
>    follow this argument, sure NT beats OS/2, but so would any other OS that I
>    just make up as I go along.

Phantom?  I listed no phantom features in my list... who did?

>
>    I know, I am going to get flamed by someone with the "I've seen NT"
>    written everywere.

I volunteer... do I win the prize?

>
>    Maybe these people should be but on the news right after the segment on
>    the gentleman who has seen the Virgin Mary. (Just a thought)

That shows a major difference between us... you watch "news" that would
put on such a story... I watch McNeil/Leher. :-)

>
>    Advocacy, to my understanding, means, support, or even admiration. Why
Output from webster advocacy, advocate, support

ad.vo.ca.cy \'ad-v*-k*-se-\ n : the act or process of advocating : SUPPORT
  1. support               

1. ad.vo.cate \'ad-v-k*t, -.ka-t\ n [ME advocat, fr. MF, fr. L advocatus,
   fr. pp. of advocare to]summon, fr. ad- + vocare to call - more at VOICE 1:
   one that pleads the cause of another; specif : one that pleads the cause of
   another before a tribunal of judicial court : COUNSELOR 2: one that defends 
   or maintains a cause or proposal
2. ad.vo.cate \-.ka-t\ \.ad-v*-'ka--sh*n\ \'ad-v*-.ka-t-*r\ vt : to plead 
   in favor of - ad.vo.ca.tion n

1. sup.port \s*-'po-(*)rt, -'po.(*)rt\ vt [ME supporten, fr. MF supporter,
   fr. LL supportare, fr. L, to] carry, fr. sub- + portare to carry - more at
   FARE 1: to endure bravely or quietly : BEAR 2a1: to promote the interests
   or cause of 2a2: to uphold or defend as valid or right : ADVOCATE 2a3: to
   argue or vote for 2b1: ASSIST, HELP 2b2: to act with VERIFY 3: to pay the
   costs of : MAINTAIN 4a: to hold up or serve as a foundation or prop for 4b:
   to maintain (a price) at a high level by purchases or loans; also : to
   maintain the price of by purchases or loans 5: to keep from fainting,
   yielding, or losing courage : COMFORT 6: to keep (something) going means to
   favor actively one that meets opposition. SUPPORT is least explicit about
   the nature of the assistance given; UPHOLD implies extended support given
   to something attached or challenged; ADVOCATE stresses urging or pleading;
   BACK suggests supporting by lending assistance to one failing or falling;
   CHAMPION suggests publicly defending one unjustly attacked or too weak to
   advocate his own cause SYN syn SUPPORT, UPHOLD, ADVOCATE, BACK, CHAMPION
2. support n 1: the act or process of supporting : the condition of being
   supported 2: one that supports

It is clear from the definitions that one needs an adversarial crowd.

>    does it seem as if MS has undercover people that constantly send proMS,
>    boo-OS/2 stuff everywere.

Take for example my case, with my list of OS/2 vs NT features.
Before I went to the NT Developer Conference I had an attitude toward OS/2
and against NT that would rival all but the most zealous of OS/2 supporters.
I really didn't think NT existed, and that Microsoft was talking hype.
To that point I believed that Microsoft was trying to hold back the world
from 32-bit operatings systems by aggressively promoting the "hack" that
Windows 3.X clearly is.

At the conference, Microsoft proved that not only that they were not trying
to keep the world 16-bit, but that they had an OS that was far better than
OS/2, and even (and this one hurt me the worst) far better than Unix.
I was emotionally VERY upset about this.  But I believe I'm a pragmatist...
If Microsoft has the better OS, has the marketing, the user base, etc...
why shouldn't they win?  This is not a situation like DOS was where it
all occurred more because of timing and the IBM name than actual merit.
NT simply has the design and features that it deserves to win.

In general my posts are designed not only to tout NT, but to show IBM
that they are behind.  This is healthy.  IBM does not seem to react well
on its own... and they do listen these days.  My current list also has
the effect of showing Microsoft NT's weak points, and I'm betting they're
listening too. (For example NT lacks a REXX equivalent.)
If you want to end up with a nice version of OS/2... how can you be
upset at these posts?

>
>    I don't think my feelings are unique. Isn't there some sort of comp.os.nt
>    line these people can join..or is there some rule stating you can't have a
>    usenet for something that does not exist in the REAL sense.

You can always put me in your kill file.

>                                                            just mho,
...
>   ---------------------------------
>  | Brian Van Lieu                  |         Let the MS Gods know
>  | Lehigh University               |     they cannot rule the application
>  | lbv2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu          |     world anymore.
>  |                                 |         Tell Gates that he must make
>  | ' You can't change the world    |     good on his promises for support.

					Demand that IBM develop for NT!!!!
						:-) :-) :-)

Brian
-- 
C. Brian Sturgill                       *** OS/2 2.0 is for YOU! ***
University of Utah                  Microsoft needs some competition, but
Center for Software Science        -I- want to be one of the many using NT.
brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373           :-) :-) :-)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy