From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Subject: Re: OS/2 VS NT! The Future War Looms...
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 20:40:00 GMT

In article <195f1tINNofj@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) writes:
>
>In a previous article, brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) says:
>
>>>Now, networking is important.  In fact, networking is critical to most
>>>businesses.  And OS/2 + *a* network is still cheaper than NT, which is
>>>what I said originally.
>>
>>But that just isn't so.  The cheapest peer-to-peer networking you can get from
>>IBM is TCP/IP+NFS  Cost: $195(OS/2 list price) + $200 (TCP Basekit) +
>>$150 (NFS -- I just looked up the NFS price) = $545
>>
>>That comes out to more than $500... how can you say that OS/2 can give
>>you the same for less?
>
>
>Wrong.
>
>IBM sells netware lite.  Netware lite runs under os/2 and only costs $79.

ARE YOU SURE?!  Because if you are--Netware Lite does something that the
top-selling peer-to-peer network for the PC's doesn't do.  Are you sure you
don't mean "Netware lite runs under OS/2 in a DOS box?"  or "Netware lite
runs under on an OS/2 networkstation (as opposed to a server)"?

This is NOT a flame.  This is excitement.  Because everybody I've talked to
says that Netware Lite does NOT run under OS/2--except in a DOS box (which
basically means that only stuff run inside the DOS box can use the network).
If you KNOW otherwise, please e-Mail me.

>
>And with a windows upgrade, I can get peer to peer OS/2 for $158 list price.  
>It is a messy, but it does give you peer to peer networking, and it is all 
>bought from IBM, so it nullifies your claim.

How is "peer to peer" messy?  Please qualify this.  Peer to peer under DOS
and Yea, under Windows, is perfectly suitable.  What is IBM's peer to peer
for OS/2?  Netware Lite?  Again e-Mail me, this is of insurmountable 
interest to me.

>
>
>Brian,
>
>Why are you being such a fanatic?  Do a hand full of os/2 zelots really
>bother you to such a degree that you have to fly completely off the other
>side of the scale?  Were you that upset when you didn't get a 'June' csd
>that you are under taking a holy war to cast mud on the name of OS/2 ?
>Do you like to pick logic for hours on end?  Do you leave little drops of
>spit on your monitor when you see that someone claims 1 million units of 
>OS/2 have been sold when you know in your heart that 1 million were 
>shipped, not sold?  
>

I will stand up for this guy.  Read his original post.  The smiley at the
end of the tirade shows that what he said was tongue-in-cheek.  Re-quotes
of his post left out the humor... intentionally or not, I don't know.

>Windows NT is 4-10 months away from shipping.
>Let's wait to see what ships and then make our judgements, O.K.?
>Just sit back and let history decide the winner in the operating 
>system wars, it is going to be the only thing that does, anyway.

Yes.  I agree.  That's why I don't urge any of my clients to switch
to OS/2 yet.  Wait until the contender is up--and the direction for the
future is clear before comitting resources...  this is only wisdom.

My opinions.

Joe 


Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy