From: Mark Kovarski <kovarski@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.1 specifications, release date.
Organization: ZOOiD BBS
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 01:21:40 GMT

brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>In article <3500@accucx.cc.ruu.nl> nevries@accucx.cc.ruu.nl (Nico E de Vries) writes:
>>Here the official specs of OS/2 2.1 directly from IBM:
>>
>>- more printer drivers
>>- Windows 3.1 support
>>- native Windows 3.1 performance with 8Mb RAM machines
>>- improved performance for low memory configurations
>>- 32bit graphics engine
>>- multimedia support
>>- portable PC support
>>- CD-ROM version
>>
>>[please notice the Win31 performance and the MultiMedia, thanx IBM!]
>>
>>OS/2 2.1 will be released end february, begin march 1993.
>
>Hmm... but IBM _officially_ said that it would be out by the end of the
>year!!!  Do I detect a SLIPPAGE? :-)
>
>In all seriousness, I'd prefer they waited till it was ready (for a change).
>But OS/2 fans have been more than a little obnoxious about harping on
>Windows NT "slipages".  And unlike IBM, Microsoft is quite frank about
>the fact that their target dates may slip.
>
>Another item that seems to have "slipped", IBM also promised good video
>driver support... I don't see this in you list?
>
>>
>>Nico E. de Vries  (nevries@cc.ruu.nl) |------------------*   AA   III  PPP
>
>Brian
>-- 
>C. Brian Sturgill                          NeXTStep 486 is for _YOU_!!!!
>University of Utah                    Microsoft needs competition, but I want
>Center for Software Science          to be one of the many running Windows NT!
>brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373    :-) :-) :-)  NT SDK: $69; (800) 227-4679


Mr. Sturgill,

before I go on, I would like to tell you that I droped out of the Microsoft
NT program due to disappointment and poor service by Microsoft. It seems like
Microsoft has lost touch with reality and its customers. I have two systems,
a 486/50 MHz with 16 MB RAM, and a 486/33 with 32 MB RAM. I can assure you,
there aren't to many users that find it justifiable to get 16 or more
megabytes of RAM just to run NT. This is a fact, not a myth. At CCS I have
talked to an NT developer who was running NT with 32 Megabytes of RAM,
largely due to the fact that he found it not effiecent enough with 16 Meg.
It seems like NT has not changed dramatically. As far as dates and releases,
IBM has the advantage that OS/2 is already released while Microsoft is
struggling to release their first copies. This has been going on for a long
time, promises by Microsoft but nothing else. Microsoft is getting into the
area where big talk dominates over action.

I have attended the Win32 conference and I find it amusing you to say that
it changed you opinion. I will quote something, and I am sure all Microsoft
people will recall, where Gates on numerous occasions repeated, "OS/2 is one
of the most famous failures of all time in operating systems." To boost
even further his ego, they demonstrated a demo application called SpinDIB,
where a face of Gates was rotating. BTW, it was running on a Mips 4000
machine. I found the whole scenerio rather amusing. Yes, it was bash OS/2
conference without any exciting new information coming forward.

At the Canadian Computer Show and Conference, Microsoft had _ONE_ system
running NT. A 486 with 12 MB of RAM and a 4-processor (50 MHz 486) NCR
Tower running a silly diagnostic program. The machine was equipped with
250 MB of RAM. This is the same one that was at the Win32 conference, as
you might recall. I was at that area for more than 1/2 hour and the most
people that stoped and looked was 7-9 people. There were a few people
who were running NT and I don't recall even one being excited as you are.
Nothing was presented, just talk and talk and talk. And the answers from
the Microsoft official were very immature. When asked by me why NT
was that slow and what people can do. His reply was that if you are not
satisfied, the NCR is a good alternative. I further asked how many
people can afford the NCR Tower, his reply, "Well, I guess some can."
Great, if you are not satisfied with the performance of NT, get a 
$100,000 machine and you should be okay. This is more than absurd. If 
Microsoft wants for customers to remain with them, they better smarten
up fast or otherwise they will be very surprised how fast people can
switch. The CCS was the ultimate turning point for me, IBM and the
staff at IBM Canada has a clearer, and to be honest, a more mature
approach. After I voiced my opinion on another network, the name
Kovarski was associated with an, and I will tell you exactly what
one Microsoft official posted in a public message, "Idiot" and
"Schmuck." I have discontinued to upload any NT related files to
local systems and as far as I am concerned, I will Microsoft all
the best in the future. With an attitude like that, there is little
hope that Microsoft will ever get it. Ultimately, it will all come
back...

Best Regards,
Mark K.