🚀 go-pugleaf

Randy Olan <ro...@ibm.net> wrote in article
<5bk62e$9...@mblisd.macquarie.com.au>...
> In article <01bc026e$bd4f9a20$8f201e26@speedbird>,<snip>
> I'd like to contend this statement.  I don't think MS makes
superior
> products, I think they just market their name better. 

I think that they do Both.  That's why they are a success.

 >Take the Windows 95
> launch for example, they spent millions just to launch a product
that
> was playing catchup with OS/2 and MacOS, to this day Windows 95
is
> not superior to MacOS or OS/2 Warp,

>From what I understand, MacOS is not a multi-threaded OS so that
takes it out of the picture IMO.  As far as OS/2 is concerned, yes
it is a good OS but Win95 is a better all around OS.  I have used
Warp 3.0 for about two years but now use Win95 and can honestly say
that Win95 beats OS/2 all respects.  Although I do miss the
uniformed User Interface of Warp, since Win95 is universally
supported I am much happier because I can actually find software
for it and hardware drivers for it for just about anything.

Might I ask what OS you are using and why?  I would also like to
know what other OS's you have used besides your present OS and for
how long?

 >but it is better supported by PC
> and peripheral manufacturers.  Why?  Well their licensing deals
with PC
> makers basically prevents PC makers from bundling any other OS
than
> Windows and since MS markets themselves so well and everyone
involved
> with PCs basically knows about MS and Windows it would be safer
to
> bet on Windows than any other PC OS, the same goes for peripheral
makers.

IBM could have done the same thing but didn't.  That was their
choice.  As for the MAC OS, well you have to have a MAC OS if you
want to run a MAC so I guess that point is moot.

> 
> As for, the normal person out there on the street, I'm sure MS
and
> Windows will be a much more brand recognised name than any other
computer
> software maker and product, so of course if they're in the market
> for an office suite, 

People buy brand name items from brand name companies because they
know what they are getting.  Microsoft and IBM are both brand names
but customer's will pick the one brand name that they feel is a
better product.  In most cases that would be Microsoft.

There seems to be this attitude floating around in the OS/2
community that basically associates ignorant people with the
purchase and use of Win95 whereas OS/2 users somehow think that
their choice of using OS/2 somehow makes them more intelligent or
superior.  IMHO nothing could be further from the truth.  Speaking
for myself, I could probably tell you more about OS/2 than you
would probably care to know.  I associated my switch from OS/2 Warp
to Win95 as a matter of common sense and convenience.


>MS would probably be first on the list simply
> because they've heard of them.  Would you buy a product from a
company
> you've at least heard about or from one you've never heard of
before?
> Although from what I've heard Office 97 is quite a superior
product.
> But did I fail to mention that in a lot of computer literature
I've read,
> especially the ones directed at advicing home computer users, MS
also
> gets some great publicity, even if the writers usually sound like
> they're major experience is in using only MS and windows
products.  It's
> especially annoying if they try to review a rival OS such as OS/2
> and its quite clear (to an OS/2 user) that the reviewer doesn't
at least
> the same level of experience with OS/2, as they do with Windows.
> 

Yes, and there is good reason for that.  Simply put, not enough
people use OS/2 and there just isn't that much money in it.  If a
developer can make five times more money making a Win32 app rather
than an OS/2 app what would you think the developer's choice would
be.  The age old fact is that money makes the world go round.

I was the kind of person that purchased every issue of OS/2
Magazine and OS/2 Professional magazine.  Now I can't find either
of them at the newsstands.  The only software I could buy would
have to come from IndBlue and what they had was too limited, ie not
much at all.  That was my wake up call.

> All of this of course leads to MS and associated products to look
> very good indeed, and hence people will generally look for their
products.
> 

Yep, everybody does it.  It's called sales & marketing

> >what has made them such a large company.  I say congrats
microsoft, and
> 
> I'd congratulate MS for their marketing, but IMHO I think we'd
> be further ahead if MS didn't comtrol the PC Desktop and Office
Applications
> so strongly.
> 

I don't think that matters.  The competition is there.  For
example, if you don't want Office97 then get the Corell Office
Suite or Lotus Suite or something else.  Even OS/2 has at least two
Suites that I can think of.

> >paul, quit your bitching and just don't buy from microsoft if it
bothers
> >you so much.
> 
> Well, I don't actually agree with the ideas of the original
thread.
> I don't use MS products because IMHO they're unstable from
revision 
> to revision

I disagree with this.  Warp was more unstable for me than Win95 is
today and same goes for the apps I use/used.  But I have my opinion
and you have yours.  Nothing to argue about there.

 >and can require you to have to buy upgrades.  

IBM makes you buy upgrades also, so I'm not sure what your point is
on this.  Also, both IBM and Microsoft have their FixPacks & 
ServicePacks and they are free so the picture is pretty much the
same there.

>And they're too
> restrictive in the platforms they support, 

How is that exactly?  NT runs on more platforms than any version of
OS/2 ever made.

>they're even dropping
> Win 3.1 support these days.

I don't think so.  Win16 apps are very much alive and well.  Give
me a few examples please?

> 
> Just the $0.02 worth
> 

All in all, I try to avoid OS war type postings because they are
for the most part pointless.  An OS is simply a tool.  You use the
tool that fits what you do.  I use Quicken95 to pay bills and keep
track of my mortgage and investments,  MSIE 3.0, MSNM, GNN Press,
Globalchat, Kali95, and FTP95Pro for Internet Stuff, and MS Works
to do everything else, and I sometimes have time to play Red Alert
for Win95 or MS Flight Sim95 Etc so.....Win95 is the OS for me.

What I don't really like about the "My OS is better than your OS"
postings is that there is always somebody that more or less
insinuates that Win95 users are somehow inferior to non-Win95 users
and this is what bothers me.  I am not saying that you are flaming
Win95 users so don't take it that way, but I just want all of you
non-Win95 and non-WinNT users to know that most Windows95 users
have a good head on their shoulder just like you may have so do not
assume the opposite.

Thank You.

-- 
Robert
murp...@vvm.com
aka "Gonzo" on Kali
http://www.vvm.com/~murphree


> Cheers,
> Randy  
> 
>