From: tlilley@jarthur.claremont.edu (Thomas (Ted) Lilley)
Subject: Re: COMDEX Awards
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 19:39:21 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.143455.22272@itsmail1.haOAmilton.edu> jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
>In article <1992Nov23.010109.53867@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS) writes:
>
>[deleted: PC/Computing's rationale for tech excellence awards to OS/2
>and Windows]
>>
>>Quite honestly, that sounds like a cop out.  If the award is to be determined
>>on technical excellence, then judge it on technical excellence.  If it is to
>>be a popularity contest, then make it a popularity contest.  (You can guess
>>which would win in each case)  Since OS/2 can run *most* win stuff, I really
>>don't see how in a majority of cases you are losing anything by using it tho.
>>I think that PC computing is following the CYA school of journalism.
>>(CYA=cover your ass)
>
>Tecnical excellence is not defined simply as 'which os promises more'
>(in which case OS/2 wins) but must include something along the lines of
>'which promises and delivers more of that promise,' at least as far as
>I'm concerned.  I hardly think OS/2 deserved an award for forcing me
>back to plain vanilla VGA when I was able to use SVGA within a couple
>of months of the release of Wind 3.0 and right away after the release of
>Win 3.1.

Technical excellence is a matter of design and implementation.  Market
popularity is a broader  measure, which in encompasses technical excellence,
cost-effectiveness, and compatibility issues.  Because market popularity
takes a weighted average of these, technical excellence may or may not play
a deciding role (a la DOS).  If PC/C is giving an award on technical
excellence, OS/2  has to be the winner.  If they're giving an award on 
popularity, Windows has to be the winner.  This does not demean the value
of a popularity award...the popularity award is more of a real-world  measure
of a product.  However, I tend to agree with SJB, that PC/C is covering it's
ass.  By mistakenly factoring popularity in with technical excellence, Windows
encroaches on OS/2's territory.  I believe they should've given product
excellence awards along with technical excellence awards.  Then we could easily
separate where each product falls.

>
>Secondly, there's technical excellence and then there is perceived
>technical excellence.  I have no doubt that if an award were being give
>for excellence in design of an OS by a group of disinterested (could we
>find any? :) engineers, OS/2 would win.  But if you ask even only the
>most computer literate users of the world if Windows 3.1 deserves an
>award, I suspect most would say yes, though their reasoning would not be
>based on OS design philosophy.

What you have here is comparable to what I have above, although "perceived
technical excellence" is a poor measure at best.  Ideally, perception is
not a factor in a supposedly empirical measure.  Although we cannot reach
the ideal, to do anything less than try to reach for it is to skew the result.
To actually base a such a measure on "perception", meaning in your case to
remove the judgment from those who are best informed to make such a decision,
is to remove legitimacy from that measure.

>  I don't think there's anything wrong
>with deciding that Windows 3.1 is good or excellent since it works for
>me.

You are entirely right here.  Windows is the best PC environment there is,
in many people's eyes.

>  If you've got a complaint, it's that PC/C didn't define their
>standards in a narrow enough techno-weenie way to limit the award only
>to OS/2 (or, if they did, I didn't see that).

You are being very judgmental here.  SJB was complaining that they were
waffling, which they were indeed.   His complaint was legitimate, IMHO.
Obviously, you beg to differ, but the manner in which you base your judgment
above is rather weak.  I would hope my assessment of the division between
tech. excellence and product excellence would make a little more sense.

>
>Happy Thanksgiving, one and all!i
>

Happy Thanksgiving as well.

Ted
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy