HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jlehmann@zuunix.zuo.dec.com (Jonas Lehmann OMC-TIMS @ZUO 760-3235)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Reply-To: jlehmann@zuunix.zuo.dec.com (Jonas Lehmann OMC-TIMS @ZUO 760-3235)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 07:53:36 GMT



Personally, I think this thread is getting out of control.

The bottom line is that Microsoft decided to distribute NT
on CD-ROM only. Now as an end-user or developer you
have three simple options: 

1. You buy a CD-ROM and NT on CD-ROM
2. You buy NT and install it from a friend's CD-ROM drive
3. You just don't get Windows NT!

If these options don't appeal to you then you should
perhaps write a formal request for NT on another reasonable
media (streamer tape, 3.5" floppies or whatever) and
include in that request some kind of convincing argument
on why it is good for Microsoft to distribute it on this 
other media.

I think it is really sad to see the behavior of many
people here on USENET. It seems to me that 
much too frequently people here start attacking
companies and representatives on various topics.
Naturally, I think it is correct to state an opinnion
but far too often I think threads go on too long
and endsup being a "fight" between a group
of individuals and the rest of the readers
just avoid the thread.

We should all not forget that Microsoft
has put out a set of very good products
and that they have developed Windows 3.1
which today is used world-wide many
more times than most /all? other GUIs.

We are also fortunate to have a set of 
Microsoft employees participating
on these conferences. We should use
this fact but not abuse it.

Respect and politeness is something we should re-introduce 
to USENET.  I don't know what is worse, Porno GIFS or
this thread.


While I am at it....

I seem unable to get the July 92 NTKIT in the near future from
the local Microsoft people.  I was wondering if there is some
other possibility to get it faster since we are in bad need of
a KITASAP.

Take Care

--
Jonas A. Lehmann * Digital Equipment Corporation * Duebendorf Switzerland
Email: jlehmann@zuo.dec.com
From: Lowey@Sask.USask.CA
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:22:03 GMT
Reply-To: lowey@jester.usask.ca
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Originator: lowey@jester.usask.ca

From sammy@anagld.analytics.com (Sam Blackburn):
> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> 
>>I've installed bigger things than NT from floppies.  Also from TAPE
>>(which I think is a more reasonable choice, personally -- at least a
>>tape is useful to me for backing things up when I'm not spending time
>>reinstalling NT.

> I, for one, like the idea of NT on CD-ROM.  It's a no-brainer to
> install from, it's a nice addition to the system to have to access the
> other CD-ROMs on the market, and I can use it to listen to music while
> I program.  Can a tape do that?

I also am thrilled about the use of CD-ROMS as a distribution method.
I think it is long overdue.  Unfortunately, I do NOT have a CD-ROM, so
I cannot get the NT alpha.

The problem isn't that Microsoft is using CD-ROMS to distribute the
software.  The problem is that Microsoft is ONLY using CD-ROMS to distribute
NT.  The key word there is "ONLY".
-- 
- Kevin Lowey (Lowey@Sask.USask.CA)
>>>>> Anonymous FTP to FTP.USASK.CA for DOS, OS/2, and Windows programs <<<<<
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: terryfry@access.digex.com (Terry Fry)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 05:03:58 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.041049.9725@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> rickh@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (OL Hansen richard har 3055722800) writes:
>Why is everyone so unhappy about CD ROM? I, for one, have complained

>As for NT - this is the first OS I've ever worked with that knows
>what intelligence is all about - it distributes tasks, and itself,
>in a way that lets me be less concerned with OS intrinsics and 
>more in touch with what the computer is doing FOR me.

Wonderful.  Where have you been?  This is only what OS/2, Unix, and other
systems have been doing for quite a while.  Not exactly leading edge.
From: sammy@anagld.analytics.com (Sam Blackburn)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 20 Aug 92 02:53:16 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation - Systems Engineering Division

mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>As a software developer, I don't need to do this.
>As a software developer, I don't need to do this.

>>MS will be shipping a developer's
>>CD with 30,000-40,000 pages of information on it.  Reading the data in that
>>database in a random-access manor would be insufferable via tape.

>But I don't DO those other things.  Why should a software developer
>have to buy a CD-ROM drive, then?

You wouldn't want to keyword search 30-40K pages of reference material to
help you track down a bug?  You don't want to learn about techniques and 
tried and true methods documented in that text?
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: dpbsmith@world.std.com (Daniel P. B. Smith)
Subject: Apples did TOO have hard disks
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 10:07:25 GMT

Actually, this is an interesting point. 15 years ago would be 1977, which
I think is the year the Apple ][, Commodore PET, and Tandy TRS-80 were
introduced, so that's pretty early. But if you say 10 years ago, it's
1982, which means the IBM PC was starting to look like a success, the
LISA I believe had just been introduced, CP/M systems were the established,
standard workhorses, etc.

Now, the interesting point is that in 1982, hard disks were very common
items for advanced users.  So-called "Winchester" drives had been introduced
into the mini world for long enough to dominate the disk drive market, and
were very familiar to the personal computer-using community. External
hard disks were very available AS THIRD-PARTY ADD-ONS for both the Apple
and the IBM PC. The popular brand names escape me, especially for the Apple.
I kinda think Tecmar and Davong were making stuff for the PC.

The strange part is that both Apple and IBM seemed to drag their feet
unconscionably long about designing this technology into their own
products.  I've never understood why.  Maybe because they still had the
idea that they would manufacture peripherals themselves?  I wonder how
much of the IBM PC market domination was due to IBM's smarts in coming
out with the XT as soon as they did (late 82? early 83?) and Apple's
stupidity (they had to be dragged kicking and screaming; Apple-branded
hard disks of ANY kind were not available until, I think, 1986, and the
first Macs with internal hard drives as preinstalled options not until
1987). (Whoops, that's wrong -- the Apple ProFile 5 MB for the Lisa was
probably available, hmmm... 1984?)  

In fact, cheap, reliable, designed-in hard disks that could be bought
preinstalled as an integral part of the system were a big step, if not
THE big step, in transforming PC's from toys that showed the potential
into tools that fulfilled the promise.

Does anyone have any thoughts on WHY the big manufacturers delayed so
long?  And, similarly, why are they so slow to introduce high-capacity
removable storage (Bernoulli, SyQuest, floptical or true optical?) I
mean, why is IBM putting their users through the misery of yet another
standard (2.88 MB 3.5" floppies on their high-end machines only)?  For
that pain, shouldn't we be getting at least 20 meg on the media?

Anyway, hard disks WERE common in 1982 -- about as common as high
capacity removable-cartridge disks are now.  But you had to get them
as external devices from third parties. And, in retrospect, I can't
think why not.


-- 
Daniel P. B. Smith
dpbsmith@world.std.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:00:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: mksol.1992Aug19.190037.28937
Distribution: na
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <mcnally.714169365@wsl.pa.dec.com> mcnally@wsl.dec.com (Mike McNally) writes:

>discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:

>>In article <1992Aug18.162641.13575@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>>This isn't an upgrade to a newer technology, and it is NOT cheaper for
>>>me.  It might be much more convenient for YOU, but that's Microsoft's
>>>problem, not mine.  I CANNOT WRITE TO A CD-ROM.  THEREFORE, THERE IS
>>>NO REAL REASON TO BUY ONE EXCEPT FOR ARROGANT VENDORS WHO SEEM TO
>>>THINK THEY CAN FORCE THEM ON PEOPLE.

>>If you don't like the fact that some vendors choose to distribute their
>>software in the cheapest way possible (for them), then don't buy it.
>>Nobody's forcing you to.

>I agree.  I personally am pleased as punch that Microsoft is pushing
>CD-ROM technology, because it will drive the market and make production
>of (read-only) collections of data much more lucrative.  I will be
>very happy when there's a huge selection of on-line (yes, read-only) 
>data available for purchase.

Silly me, and here all this time I always thought it was the
PURCHASERS who were supposed to be 'driving the market', not the
sellers.  As in, Microsoft would 'push' it when consumers were
demanding it, not Microsoft will push it on customers by offering them
no other alternatives, whether they want it or not.

>If you (Fred) don't want to play, I don't care.

Then why comment?

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:1921 comp.os.os2.advocacy:4194
From: sammy@anagld.analytics.com (Sam Blackburn)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 19 Aug 92 01:22:58 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Distribution: na
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation - Systems Engineering Division

mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>(as in backups -- remember backups?).  Try backing your system up to
>your CD-ROM sometime and see how far you get. :-)

Or even try to write a ROM program cartridge for the TI99/4A. :-)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: rkl@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (kevin.laux)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 16:47:44 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy

In article <1992Aug18.162641.13575@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> Well, my first computer HAD floppies, but let's look at that assertion
> a minute.  By switching from tape to floppy, I got faster load times,
> random access reads/writes, etc.  Now, what do I get from having a
> CD-ROM that might be useful to me?  The ability to load the Windows/NT
> SDK.  That's it.  It's not worth buying a CD-ROM drive for.

	You can't find *anything* else that comes on CD-ROM that would be
useful to you?  This is the Information Age and there's tons of it.  Have
any inclination to work with Mulimedia?  Video, audio and graphics take up
a hell of a lot of space, even compressed.

> >Would you have us still living in the world of cassette tapes for data
> >storage, where load times were measured in minutes for even the smallest
> >applications.
> 
> YOU CAN'T WRITE TO A FRIGGING CD-ROM!  Why is it that folks at
> Microsoft don't seem to be able to understand that?  WHY WOULD I WANT
> TO BUY A MASS STORAGE DEVICE THAT I CAN'T WRITE TO?

	For Massive amounts of data that you don't want to even inadvertantly
destroy or overwrite.  Hey, there *are* advantages to read-only media.  I
don't have to make a backup copy and so don't have *twice* the amount of
floppies to store THAT I CAN'T WRITE TO, or else I lose the software and the
bucks I put out to buy it.

> This isn't an upgrade to a newer technology, and it is NOT cheaper for
> me.  It might be much more convenient for YOU, but that's Microsoft's
> problem, not mine.  I CANNOT WRITE TO A CD-ROM.  THEREFORE, THERE IS
> NO REAL REASON TO BUY ONE EXCEPT FOR ARROGANT VENDORS WHO SEEM TO
> THINK THEY CAN FORCE THEM ON PEOPLE.
> 
> Do you get it yet?

	Arrogant Vendors?  Forcing CD-ROM drives on people?  Pure opinion;
lack of supporting data.  Gee, I guess all the software vendors distributing
on CD-ROMs all have large stakes in the CD-ROM hardware manufacturers.  Why
else would they force CD-ROMs on customers?  :)

	Lastly, you could always use the CD-ROM drive to play Audio CDs while
you work or play.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________________
	R. Kevin Laux				Email: rkl1@hound.att.com
	AT&T Bell Labs				Voice: (908) 949-1160
	Holmdel, NJ 07733			Fax:   (908) 949-0959
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 23:01:19 GMT
Distribution: na
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Aug18.214051.25793@njitgw.njit.edu>  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
> In article <1992Aug17.162636.19288@nosc.mil> discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes
> >True.  For a very expensive drive.  600mb of storage for $200 is not
> >"very expensive."  A Net optical drive costs around $2500 for 300mb and
> >*then* $250 for each 300mb media.  CD-ROM costs less than $5 per disk
> >(depending on the software).  Heck, you can get the ENTIRE simtel library
> >for only $20!
>
> This is where the utility comes in - where you find cheap CD's.  $20
> for the entire WSMR-SIMTEL20 archive, etc.  I like the idea of paying
> less than $50 for 500MB of shareware/freeware.
>
> What I don't like is the CD-ROM software you find in stores - they
> typically want over $300 for one application - even ones that sell for
> less money on floppy.  Corel Draw! is one example - the CD should cost
> LESS than the floppy version, not more - it costs about $10 to press a
> computer-grade CD, compared to the $0.50 per disk it costs to write HD
> floppies.  This gouging is giving the CD-ROM market a very bad name.

It should, *if* you were receiving the same amount of material.  However,
I believe that the CD comes with many megabytes of clipart.  The difference
in price probably represents their charge for the clipart library.

> But the vendors charge more money for the CD's than they do for tapes
> and diskettes.

This is reasonable *if* they take advantage of the extra capacity to give
you more than you would get buying the diskettes.  If there is no difference
in what you get, then it seems unreasonable, and you can tell them so - or
vote with your wallet.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wiegand@rtsg.mot.com (Robert Wiegand)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Reply-To: motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 14:59:00 GMT

mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>In <1992Aug14.181226.18213@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:

[Stuff deleted]

>>If you look back not too many years, you'll see people with
>>similar complaints to yours - they were complaining about
>>floppies.

>Gee, I just don't recall that many machines that didn't ship with
>FLOPPY DRIVES.  I must've taken a REAL long nap in there somewhere. 

[Stuff deleted]

>-- 
>"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
> in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

Yes most machines had floppy drives - but they were low-density drives.
A lot of people were pissed off when software started shipping on high
density disks and they had to buy new floppy drives. By your logic
everything should be shipped on single sided - single density disks just
so everyone can load the software no matter how out-of-date their system is.

Its a fact of life in the PC business that state of the art changes every
few years. If you can't handle the change maybe you should look into
finding another job.


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Wiegand - Motorola Inc.
uunet!motcid!wiegand
Disclamer: I didn't do it - I was somewhere else at the time.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: st1g9@rosie.uh.edu (Lee Preimesberger)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 01:34:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.172140.15622@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes...
#The SDK, etc., is 1 GIGABYTE in size?  Hell, what are you going to put
#it on when you take it off the CD-ROM?  Either there's something wrong
#with the numbers you're giving or MS lied about what size hard drive
#you should have.
# 

	I would assume only a total fool would put all the documentation
and source on his hard drive.  That's one of the reasons to have a CD-ROM.

# 
#Ever heard of TAPE?  Ever heard of MEDIA CHARGES?
# 

	Shipping out spools of 9 track tape probably isn't that good of
an idea.  If it's shipped on 120 meg tape (the size most folk have), I would 
assume NT would eat up 9 $20.00 tapes.  Not that smart either.  Even then, 
you would have to do the tape drive shuffle when you wanted to read part of 
the on-line documentation, since nobody has enough drive space to hold
this mother.

	You've made it fairly clear you don't like CD-ROM - if so you're
welcome to get along without it.  Bill Gates isn't coming to your house
and holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy one.  Like it or not,
CD-ROM seems to be here to stay.

#[For those who don't know, media charges are what you get billed for
#the cost of the medium over and above the cost of the product if you
#opt for the 'non-optimal' medium of tape or floppies.  Lots of
#companies manage this just fine.  Why can't Microsoft?  To which I
#would add, why can't Sun?]

	Walk into your local college campus CS department with your CD's,
tapes, and $50.  Within ten minutes you'll find someone willing to copy it
over for you.  Really, Fred...these things aren't in Sanskrit! :-)

			  Lee Preimesberger
st1g9@jetson.uh.edu ----- Undergraduate Scum ----- University of Houston, USA
      "They went around and around.  Nobody smiled.  They just went
              around and around." - _Breakfast of Champions_
                                --+--
	Public key removed in hopes of getting the Hell out of VMS.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: potts@itl.itd.umich.edu (Paul Potts)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Organization: Instructional Technology Laboratory, University of Michigan
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 18:29:43 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.172140.15622@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Aug17.131551.18202@terminator.cc.umich.edu> potts@itl.itd.umich.edu (Paul Potts) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Aug13.213845.3007@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
...
>
>The SDK, etc., is 1 GIGABYTE in size?  Hell, what are you going to put
>it on when you take it off the CD-ROM?  Either there's something wrong
>with the numbers you're giving or MS lied about what size hard drive
>you should have.

At the Win32 conference we received three CD-ROMs, and while they weren't
completely full they weren't nearly empty, either. I of course pulled the
"904" number out of the air; with compression it could probably be
three or four hundred disks or so...

The thing is, much of that is reference material. For example, the 
international versions of Windows. Suppose I want to develop for the
Hebrew version - I would just pull that off the CD/ROM, and install it,
not copy all the versions over. It is the same way with the on-line 
technical database. I would use the searching tools and look for info
on the CD-ROM for a particular problem. 
>
>Ever heard of TAPE?  Ever heard of MEDIA CHARGES?
>

Tape is not random-access, and it is not standardized.

You also made a comment about backing up - unfortunately, right now
I have to back up 100+ megs to disks, so I am quite familiar with
using floppies, but I hate doing it. I would love a cheap, standard
read-write optical format and love to receive things like NT on it,
but for now it looks like CD-ROM is it as far as these large volumes
of data go. I really recommend a CD-ROM drive; they are coming down
in price. Although many of the existing titles are still pretty weak,
they are improving. Also, at work we have a PortaDrive, which can work
with a card on our PCs or without one on our Macs, and can be moved
between machines easily. If you really have an office full of developers
with hot machines, it doesn't seem unreasonable for someone to have a
CD-ROM drive by now. It is only through a medium like this that
Microsoft could manage to sell the SDK for $69.00.

-- 
"It'sVerySad / toSeeTheAncientAndDistinguishedGameThatUsedToBe / aModelOf
DecorumAndTranquilityBecomeLikeAnyOtherSportABattlegroundForRivalIdeologies
toSlugItOutWithGlee." (from _Chess_). -potts@itl.itd.umich.edu-