From: shurr@cbnews.cb.att.com (larry.a.shurr)
Subject: Re: Kernel Roulette
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, OH
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:15:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.181114.7476@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> pendrith@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Mark Pendrith) writes:
>
>[Mark has used 4 kernels starting with the GA and has had numerous 
>problems.  Furthermore, the problems appear to be getting worse with
>each new kernel].

>Is it too much to ask for a reliable kernel after having to suffer these four
>attempts? I'm sure I can't be alone when I say my confidence in the medium-term
>viability of OS/2 has diminished as a result of this recent "Golden" CSD farce.
>I believe IBM is losing both time and prestige and is in danger of squandering
>an ever decreasing window of opportunity with this sort of blundering. It's
>strange that everyone is asking "Can Microsoft kill off OS/2?" The irony is
>that only IBM can kill OS/2; and continuing to release unstable version after
>unstable version is the way to do it. Let's hope it doesn't happen.

I am thankful that for some reason, I have been spared the hassles 
you have endured (knock on wood).  Sure, I've had few problems, but
they've been minor and the fixes were already available by the time
I needed them (knock on wood again).  My most intractable problem
was periodic Trap 2's (memory errors) which have gone away since I
changed my XCMOS memory interleave setting (C&T chipset) from 2-way
to 4-way (better knock on wood again).  I've also switched to the 
CSD, which may or may not be as sensitive to memory problems.  My
biggest remaining complaint is the slowness of VIO & VDM windowed
sessions.

I suspect that the numerous variations on a theme -- clone hardware
from dozens (hundreds?) of vendors must create a plethora of systems
with slightly different characteristics, creating subtle compatibility
problems.  Never has there been a "plug compatible" market (to use an
old term) of such size and diversity, so nobody's ever tried to offer
OS/2-like software for it before.  'Course this doesn't help you,
since you seem to have a bad match between hardware and OS/2, and if
you're like me, you can't just run out and buy another circuit board,
even if you could be certain what to buy.  At most, it only begins to
explain (assuming I and all the rest who have speculated along these
lines are correct).  I think IBM has created a nearly impossible
testing situation, perhaps hoping that the variations are not as
great as they seem, in reality, to be.

It will be interesting to see if Microsoft can cope with the same
problems.  This may explain Microsoft's efforts to position Windows
NT as a high-end system (as evidenced by the brochure they recently
sent me extolling the virtues of Windows for Workgroups), hoping
thereby to avoid problems due to "excessive" diversity.  Still, they
can "position" all they want, but the market will do what it wants.

Unless OS/2 implodes in the marketplace, we can hope that it will
keep downward pressure on the strongest "positioning" mechanism
available: price.  Microsoft will be less free to jack the price up
in order to achieve their desired "position."  The coexistence of
OS/2 and NT may make their vendors uncomfortable, but its good for us.

I understand that when Microsoft demonstrated NT recently, they were
using an Alpha system from Digital rather than an Intel/PC system.
We have a loaner Alpha here right now, and it looks good thusfar
and Alpha will be sold in EISA-based PC-type packing at "competitive
pricing," but I'd be surprised to see clone-like pricing for it.

Implementing on the Alpha was probably easier than on Intel: the
chip is simple, fast, and NOT Intel compatible, eliminating the
need to support Intel, MSDOS, Windows 3.x, and the entire range of
386-and-above PC hardware.  That would make life easier, I'm sure.
OS/2 3.0 for the RS6000  -- which I presume without really knowing
is in the works -- will benefit similarly.

I certainly hope that IBM will get it together and produce software
capable of running reliably on the wide base of systems out there.
And I still want faster video - here's hoping for favorable pricing
on the ISA XGA-2.

Larry
-- 
Larry A. Shurr (las@cbnmva.att.com or att!cbnmva!las) speaking only for myself.
EOR (end-of-ramble)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc