From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: X is a hack? (was Re: NT goes "late Beta" in 8 weeks!)
Date: 29 Aug 92 10:39:53 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

In article <1992Aug27.145816.24108@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
> 
> I see no reason to spend my money
> on OS/2 2.0 apps until it's clear that OS/2 will have as many apps
> as NT.  With the way OS/2 2.0 currently handles 16-bit windows apps
> I see little reason why a user that uses mainly Windows apps would prefer
> it to Windows 3.1.

Well.....OS/2 as a multi-tasker makes Win3.1 look sick. *Smooth* is he word. I
tried running SAS under Windows - 3 minute response from any other app *if* I
could get to one! No problem under OS/2.
 
If all you do is use a GUI for cut and past and a bit task-switching.....well
Win3.1 does that just fine. 
 
If you want to several thiks at the same time - both within one and/or
multiple apps (multi-tasking multi-threaded apps), then OS/2 is King and
Win3.1 is a waste if time.
 
OS/2 is an operating system. Win3.1 is a gui with some clever memory
management.


> If you do mainly command-line stuff then OS/2 is
> clearly better.

You would use the command line - because you won't buy any apps. I hardly ever
see the command line under OS/2. Mind you, I hardly ever see WinOS/2 either.


> I also believe that the next new nifty apps I'd like to
> have will be on NT long before they are on OS/2.

This will only happen if people close thier eyes to the power (and the grace)
that OS/2 brings to the desktop - today. It would not be merit that caused
this.

With almost 1.5 million copies sold since the beginning of April, OS/2 looks
like it has a reasonably bright future. 
 
Apparently 300,000 copies have been sold in the past 10 days........

> >2) Why are willing to use 16-bit apps under NT and not OS/2?  Sounds like
> >a double standard to me.
> 
> I'm not willing to use 16-bit apps under NT ... yet, currently things
> are far too slow.  On the other hand I do believe that NT will, when it
> hits true beta, support 16-bit apps better than OS/2 does currently.
> Why would anyone believe that OS/2 can/will support 16-bit windows apps
> better than NT?  At the very least I would expect that Microsoft will
> do things to make it difficult for IBM after the current contract expires.

What...dirty tricks instead of relying on a quality product? I can't *wait* to
buy software from a company like that!

> No I "don't like" OS/2 because I don't believe it will have
> the app base I believe NT will. And yes I realize that attitudes like
> mine are what keeps it that way.  The point is that attitudes like mine
> seem to be prevelent in most of the PC world at the moment.

It's called the "herd instinct" and is a substitute for rational
thought.....:-)

Steve
-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | End the two-party duopoly. Vote 
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         | for the Mixed-Member Proportional 
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            | (MMP) voting system on Sept. 19th. 
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       | Give yourself a vote that *counts*!
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy