Organization: Wirtschaftsuniversitaet Wien, Vienna, Austria
Date: Friday, 6 Nov 1992 19:41:10 CET
From: FLATSCHER Rony <RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: How to make OS/2 look bad ...

Here are some hints for all journalists who want to make OS/2 look bad...

Hint 1) Do not talk or write about OS/2.

        Effect: People do not realize OS/2 might help them. Thereby you may
                stay at Windows-centric articles and do not have to rethink
                or reposition. Anyway that would not make sense, because you
                might think that DOS+Windows is not that good as you have been
                telling your readers for months now.

        What IBM can do to help that: do not advertise OS/2 and do not
        advertise OS/2 apps in the magazines. If you advertise, make it
        dull, not moving, unemotional, boring. Do not advertise its benefits
        over DOS and Windows. Anyway, Microsoft is doing a hell of an
        advertising anyway, so readers might get confused, if IBM started
        to do real marketing.

Hint 2) If you write about OS/2 do **not** explain the architecture and how it
        works. Rather write about the benefits of DOS+Windows, no matter
        whether they are true or not. As other journalists do the same, you
        are in a very good position not being contradicted. Logic and honesty
        are therefore not needed either, if that was a problem anyway.

        Effect: Readers get the impression that you are talking about OS/2, but
                DOS+Windows is much better. You need not to learn about OS/2.
                It is much easier (and less cumbersome) to use Microsoft
                press-release-articles as yours (so no need to really dig into
                the architecture and shortcomings of DOS+Windows). And you will
                get future personal "treatment" and help from Microsoft PRs.

        What IBM can do to help that: do not produce press-release-articles
                explaining OS/2, its architecture and its benefits such, that
                illedgible journalists would get explained all and could use
                those press-releases as base of their own articles. Do not
                set up knowledgable PRs people to help journalist on a personal
                basis. Probably the most important thing: do *not* let the OS/2
                IBMers allow for doing press-work, public-relations and
                marketing; rather leave that work centralized to those grateful
                people who have such a big experience in promoting mainframes
                and AS/400 - they are the right people and understand the
                market and marketing the best.

Hint 3) Do not tell your readers about the problems DOS+Windows introduces.
        Just do not say anything about memory-protection, unsheltered DOS-
        boxes, OLE-troubles, DDE-troubles. Tell them what Microsoft wants you
        to tell them: how good the concepts on paper work. The readers will
        be happy, Microsoft will be happy, and your publisher will be happy ...

        Effect: Readers get the impression that DOS+Windows is good for them.
                Microsoft will advertise on a big scale. All other ISV will
                advertise too. And you, as the bringer of good news,
                will get positive reactions. Again, no need to turn around
                to enter new lanes into the future ...

Hint 4) If you do comparison including measurements, do the following:
        Hint 4a: Let the systems seek for files, where you supply file-name
                 patterns. Do it on FAT and on one partition only.
                 Use OS/2's "Find", do **not** use "PMSEEK" !!!
                 Then you conclude (like in the November Byte) that DOS+
                 Windows is a "magnitudes faster" than OS/2.

                 Effect: Readers will learn that OS/2 is slow like a pig and
                         does not do any good for them. You **proofed** that
                         OS/2 is bad.

        Hint 4b: Let DOS+Windows and OS/2 multitask DOS-applications. Make
                 sure that DOS+Windows has enough memory and that nothing else
                 runs on DOS+Windows. Do not tell the readers that under OS/2
                 there is a lot going on in parallel.
                 Do **not** attempt to print in those DOS-sessions and DOS+
                 Windows-session **at the same time** !
                 Do **not** run DOS- or Windows-applications known to do
                 "illegal" stuff (like interrupt-table, DOS-Data-area and
                 the like).
                 Do not tell the readers that OS/2 produces (contrary to
                 DOS+Windows) a totally insulated and complete PC for every
                 DOS-Box with constant integrity checking applied. Neither
                 tell them, that those virtual machines of OS/2 allow for
                 loading true DOS-device drivers.
                 This just "confuses" the readers - they are not interested
                 in that stuff anyways...

                 Rather tell them that DOS+Windows does multitask faster.
                 Even if that is not true in most cases, try hard to find a
                 situation where this is true. A good setup is: use an old
                 16bit-version for OS/2 like the "excellent" Excel 3.0 port
                 for OS/2 with an uptodate and improved version like
                 Excel 4.0.

                 Effect: Readers will learn that OS/2 is slow, DOS+Windows
                         is fast. DOS+Windows and OS/2 are totally comparable
                         at the same level of functionality and security
                         and OS/2 is for fools ...

Hint 5) If anything else fails, tell the readers about Windows/NT; its
        features, its applications, its daemon speed. Present your infos such
        that every reader understands the need for Windows/NT and the fact that
        only Windows/NT 3.1 is the only logical successor for DOS+Windows 3.1.
        You can help your arguments by pointing out that Microsoft has exactly
        the same attitude too, and they ought to know...
        Pretend NT was here already. If it misses a release date, do not
        pick on Microsoft. They do not deserve it. They are trying hard.
        If they break promises, same as above. Mention it maybe, but do *not*
        insist that that is bad practice.
        Do **not** talk about OS/2 with its features it will have at the time
        NT will arrive at the market. And for God's sake do not tell anyone
        Windows/NT is for mighty server machines and not for the desktop. And
        if you cannot avoid to mention that fact, do not tell the readers that
        OS/2 is for the desktop. Rather tell them that OS/2 is for servers
        only too. Microsoft says the same things anyway, so you have a third
        party to backup your claims.

        Beware: Do **not** mention that NT was originally known as the portable
                OS/2 version 3.0 and by **no** means tell the readers that the
                present 32-bit OS/2 is portable already. Oh, do not even
                mention that OS/2 **is** the first true 32-bit operating
                system for PCs.

        Effect: Readers learn that OS/2 has no role to play in the PC-market,
                as the true operating system is Windows/NT. This is because
                obviously you as a journalist have to teach the readers about
                NT and not OS/2. This proofs how important NT is and how
                negligible OS/2 is. Again you need not reposition your
                attitudes as your collegues do the same thing.
                If you get in troubles in understanding NT as it supposedly is
                so different to OS/2, do not worry, Microsoft will send not
                only ready-to-print articles but if need arises (i.e. you are
                an important enough journalist) they will introduce you to a
                trip to Redmont to spell the things out for you. Never forget,
                you *have* a big brother helping and watching you...

Hint 6) ...

Well, there are many more hints. I leave it for good for today.

The most innovative ones can be read in the magazines anyway, week by week,
and month by month. I doubt though, that readers will be kept stupid ad
nauseum. Users who gave OS/2 a try, certainly see the mechanics of a big
advertiser and its journalists employed in the magazines they advertise in.

---rony
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:8384 comp.os.os2.misc:36165