CompuServe Thread

#PC Mag

38 messages in this thread
#38189From: Robert KingFeb 1, 1994 1:49 PM
>>Yup, I'm the First Looks editor for PC Mag's Network Edition. Can i get PC Mag in the UK ? >>NT wouldn't be *my*, *personal* first choice, either, its true… Most diplomatic sir <g> actually i like OS/2 a hell of a lot more – still your all copying my little Amiga <g> Full multitasking since 1988 Cheers Rob. D&D Famous last words: "Ok, i'm taking my armour off"
#38220From: Michael RyanFeb 2, 1994 10:47 AM
Yeah, I know there's a UK version of the mag, but I honestly don't know how to get in touch with them. I'll check & get back to you if I find anything helpful. BTW – I like OS/2 also, but I do think that all of these vendors could learn a lot from AmigaDOS. –MR
#38238From: Robert KingFeb 2, 1994 8:00 PM
Well I'd love to read your learned comments on the computer world <g> AmigaDOS WAS a very good OS and still is with the advent of KS#, but it only works so well because of the hardware, without the blitter it would be as slow and foul as W**dows (well maybe not THAT slow <g>) OS/2 was a real improvement but it is a shame that it was released at a time when IBM had no idea about what it was trying to do and so was beaten by The man from Microsoft.. still maybe it'll start to grab a sizeable market share as it is currently the superior OS In my opinion…. <g> Rob. D&D Famous last words: "I throw my beer at the wizard"
#38267From: Michael RyanFeb 3, 1994 2:08 PM
Maybe, maybe not… Unfortunately, the secret word is M-A-R-K-E-T-I-N-G. And IBM is worse at that than Commodore (sorry, but its a fact). Now that Windows is the de facto standard operating ENVIRONMENT (NOT an OS), Microsoft is in a very sweet position. It'll take a lot to unseat them. –MR
#38285From: Dale LarsonFeb 4, 1994 4:11 AM
In the last few years, sure. But IBM got to where they were at their peak because of excellent marketing and support. It sure as heck wasn't because they had inexpensive, technically superior solutions. Even the PC sure seemed to add to their bottom line well through the early AT days… — Dale L. Larson, Intangible Assets Manufacturing — INTERNET:dale@iam.com
#38292From: Michael RyanFeb 4, 1994 8:14 AM
No argument there, their stock didn't get up to..what? 125+? for nothing. The fact is that Microsoft is the current king of the hill. IBM w/OS/2 is definitely the closest OS competitor (and OS/2 does enjoy a substantial market presence), but NT was very, very, very late–giving OS/2 a huge window of opportunity (no pun intended <g>) to grab a chunk of the market. It didn't because MS convinced most of its loyal users to sit tight and wait for 1.5/2 years (or more) for NT to actually hit the shelves–THATS marketing power (and a missed opportunity for IBM, with the right marketing, they could've shown the PC market which OS was *really* more powerful & reliable). They're doing it again with Chicago… I'm not defending MS–I personally don't like Windows–thats just how it is. –MR, PC Mag
#38316From: Paul IdolFeb 4, 1994 11:02 PM
I think the slide or failure of Chicago might change the fate of OS/2. Paul
#38496From: Michael RyanFeb 10, 1994 9:40 AM
Yeah, it *should* have a dramatic effect. If Chicago is everything its supposed to be (yeah, OK…), I have to believe that OS/2 is doomed. Already, Windows for Workgroups is shipping pre-loaded on over 100 vendors PCs. If they do the same thing with Chicago–and people actually *like* it <shiver>–IBM will have to respond very quickly to stay afloat. If, on the other hand, Chicago is like, say Windows 3.0, well…<g> –MR
#38505From: John BonoFeb 10, 1994 5:18 PM
Though WFW is being preloaded on machines, that doesn't mean that it is being used, especially on systems that are used in any sort of business. The first thing they do is format and load either windows 3.1 or OS/2, and bag windows for workgroups. It is not well liked in large lans, because it is not exactly secure or robust. John
#38519From: Jonathan BlackwellFeb 10, 1994 7:30 PM
This is not true. WFW 3.11 is not like the original WFW. The new version is based off of Win 3.1 and if will run like the standard Windows product if you don't enable any of the sharing portions. Besides, WFW 3.11 is CHEAPER than standard 3.1 !!! What you said about people eliminating WFW used to be true, but not anymore. This is the recently released version. -Jonathan // Amiga online via Autopilot \\// MAC Quadra 900 & 486 emulation via Amiga!
#38526From: Robert ComerFeb 11, 1994 12:38 AM
We eliminate WFW 3.11… (Actually the PC's we buy don't come with it. 🙂 We're an OS/2 shop for now. Bob Comer — Flying high and fast with my A1200HD'030 on Autopilot! From Cheyenne, Wyoming U.S.A.
#38540From: Michael RyanFeb 11, 1994 9:40 AM
You took the words right out of my mouth. The second rev of WFW is much more robust & that is the version that is (or will be) pre-loaded on the 100+ vendors' PCs (just to clarify–if anyone cares). –MR, PC Mag
#38576From: Paul ToalFeb 12, 1994 2:06 AM
It's not called Chicago anymore because it's not a secret project if 93% of all journalists know about it. Now for the good news, Windows 4 (old Chicago) is dead before it even is finished. The majority of the code including the graphics routines, is 16 bit. Yep, thats right, the OS that finally loses the old 8088 anchor of backwards compatibility is going to, get this, ALSO BE BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE. Developers are incensed with their latest beta release. The almighty marketing king has decided to lie and remove the main selling point of Windows 4, 16 bit code to make more people compatible. No more state of the art 32 bit OS. This really is funny. It kills the the most anticipated and much hyped developement from Microsloth in a long time. Their is no chance of a release before the end of the year due to monumental setbacks. I believe a majority of the developers will drop their Windows 4 work. I feel so sorry for Billy boy's blunder. OS/2 looks like it will soon be king of the hill. –Paul < Motorola Inside >
#38596From: Ron LegroFeb 12, 1994 2:51 PM
Meanwhile, Novell DOS (DR DOS 7.0) is about to emerge, and the beta testers say it does preemptive multitasking very nicely on existing boxes.
#38605From: Paul DowgewiczFeb 12, 1994 8:56 PM
Ron: I read last week that Novell is considering including a license for Novell DOS 7.0 with every NetWare 4.01 sold. The license is good for all the stations on the LAN. At about 60 USD per DOS upgrade, buying Netware 4 could be a bargin for some. Paul
#38674From: Michael RyanFeb 15, 1994 9:40 AM
Novell DOS 7 = Personal NetWare for the most part, BTW. DOS 7 is touted to be the *perfect* NetWare client. That may succeed where previous attempts to market the OS have failed. (With 60%+/- of the network market, Novell is in a good position to plant its own client OS on desks, maybe, kinda…) –MR, PC Mag
#38626From: Paul IdolFeb 13, 1994 6:25 PM
Where'd you read that it's mostly 16bit? I hadn't heard that. Paul
#38866From: Paul ToalFeb 20, 1994 2:11 AM
The graphic sub-routines are mostly in 16 bit. This comes from the beta release notes shipped with the last version, not a rumor.
#38673From: Michael RyanFeb 15, 1994 9:38 AM
Paul, Hmmm… You say backwards compatibility like its a bad thing. What a strange position to take. I have not actually seen the code (and never will since it isn't my beat) but I do know that it is almost entirely new, written from the ground up. I can't confirm or deny the fact that the code is 16-bit, tho. Interesting point. >>This really is funny. It kills the the most anticipated and much hyped developement from Microsloth in a long time. Their is no chance of a release before the end of the year due to monumental setbacks.<< You can't honestly expect me to believe that you or anyone else out there is surprised that Windows 4 won't ship on time, can you?! Consider the track record… >>I believe a majority of the developers will drop their Windows 4 work. I feel so sorry for Billy boy's blunder.<< Well, I know that Lotus and Borland aren't dropping anything. Add their apps to Microsoft's own and you have a whole lot of market leaders. >> OS/2 looks like it will soon be king of the hill.<< It'd be nice, but I've heard that one before. –MR, PC Mag
#38682From: Christopher LapriseFeb 15, 1994 1:57 PM
Backward compatability _is_ a bad thing if your platform is limited enough. -Chris
#38867From: Paul ToalFeb 20, 1994 2:11 AM
It is written from the ground up. The source code for the graphics routines are 16 bit so they are backwards compatible to 8088 machines. Yes, backwards compatible is stupid for a ground up re-write with a 32 bit OS. Someone in Borland, my next door neighbor, was concerned when he saw the 16 bit routines and has stopped his end of the Windows 4 development strategy. I don't know where he sits in the command level though. Another major developer, owner is my friend, sent the release back to Microsoft with a real nasty note and is going back to Unix development.
#38639From: SyndesisFeb 14, 1994 9:14 AM
I like WinNT (release 528). It's quite stable, multitasks reasonably, runs DOS apps, has good networking… the momst whoops most Amiga-like OS on a PC so far.
#38326From: Dale LarsonFeb 5, 1994 1:33 AM
It may just be that I like underdogs. 🙂 It doesn't seem like MS is nearly as good at marketing as it is at lying. Perhaps that counts as marketing where the gullible masses of US markets are concerned… IBM sometimes spoke falsehoods, but usually they could be written off as ignorance 🙂 It's really weird to find myself kind of favoring IBM as a brand name after the way I felt about them pre-90's, but they now have various hardware and OS that I'd certainly consider buying. — Dale L. Larson, Intangible Assets Manufacturing — INTERNET:dale@iam.com
#38497From: Michael RyanFeb 10, 1994 9:43 AM
Dale, >>It doesn't seem like MS is nearly as good at marketing as it is at lying. Perhaps that counts as marketing where the gullible masses of US markets are concerned…<< Uh, no comment…<g> I fell the same as you about actually considering IBM products now. I really like OS/2! I *personally* would not buy a ValuePoint (they feel too cheap and–if a PC can be called this–flimsy!). Their network stuff is getting better & better, tho. –MR, PC Mag
#38327From: Brian BartlettFeb 5, 1994 2:27 AM
Michael, that's my read of the situation as well. BTW, good mag! Brian bjbart@watserv.ucr.edu
#38498From: Michael RyanFeb 10, 1994 9:45 AM
Gee, thanks! <g> BTW – if anyone is *really* that interested in Chicago, check out the March 94 issue of PC Computing (our sister pub). –MR
#38627From: Paul IdolFeb 13, 1994 6:26 PM
Your publication being…. ? Paul
#38675From: Michael RyanFeb 15, 1994 9:58 AM
I'm with PC Magazine's Network Edition. I'm the First Looks editor. And you? -MR
#38747From: Paul IdolFeb 16, 1994 10:29 PM
Me? I'm not with a magazine. I'm just a film student slash part-time computer/database/mis shmuck. Anyway, good mag! (For PC stuff, anyway.) Paul
#38300From: Robert KingFeb 4, 1994 2:05 PM
Hmmm, IBM worse at marketing then Commodore – it's close, still i think IBM's starting to work out where it is coming from – FINALLY – lets hope they can kick Microsoft's butt <g> 'scue the OS/Environment mix up but i understood that the intention for Cairo was for it to be a complete OS with a DOS environment…. Hmm, unseating microsoft – how about a very large bomb ? thats about all i can come up with… Rob. AD&D Famous last words: "sorry, what was that?"
#38460From: Michael RyanFeb 9, 1994 6:51 AM
IBM definitely is getting better (OK, the Commodore comparison was bad…Commodore is worse!). What they need, from an objective viewoint, is for Cairo to fall on its face. They could then (if they move swiftly) grab up market share… however, they had the same opportunity with NT… –MR
#38513From: Robert KingFeb 10, 1994 5:22 PM
I hope Cairo flops but i think that Microsoft has such a stranglehold on the market now (making customers WAIT for NT is quite a feat…) that it is almost inevitable that it will become a great success… Alternative uses for floppy disks, Number 1: Scraping ice of your car windscreen…
#38542From: Michael RyanFeb 11, 1994 9:42 AM
Yeah, if history is a guide… –MR
#38565From: Robert KingFeb 11, 1994 5:50 PM
How big do you think the OS/2 base is, most people in the know apparently appear to think of OS/2 as the better environment – but i guess there is a disparity between those who know and those who buy… Alternative uses for floppy disks, Number 3: Beer mat
#38670From: Michael RyanFeb 15, 1994 9:25 AM
Hmmm… I should know this, shouldn't I? <g> Actually, I *think* that the latest numbers I saw for OS/2 showed something like 2 million users (I don't know if thats world-wide or US, tho) –MR
#38691From: Robert KingFeb 15, 1994 5:17 PM
Yes you should know <g> 2 Million is pretty cool, did IBN ever get round to bundling machines from OEM's with OS/2 ? Alternative uses for floppy disks, Number 6: Bookmark
#38312From: Andrew ChristieFeb 4, 1994 7:32 PM
I have seen a lot more well produced commercials for IBM than I have for the Amiga. I also see IBM supporting a lot more sporting events.
#38459From: Michael RyanFeb 9, 1994 6:48 AM
Having lots of commercials is all well and good, but the point is to make it clear to the public that the products you have are as good, if not better, then someone else's. Most of the commercials I've seen for IBM (and , they are steadily improving their marketing–thanks to Gerstner <sp>) talk about the AS/400 or the ValuePoint, not OS/2. The AS/400 has a firm market share and is a curious product line to emphasize considering A) its popularity and B) the current fascination with down/right-sizing. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that they blew it and it may be too late for them to make up for their mistake. OS/2, in my opinion, is a far better OS than Windows (which isn't really an OS at all). A better marketing attack early on could've convinced the rest of the market of the same thing. PS – Maybe the comparison against Commodore wasn't the best choice…they arguably have the weakest marketing in the US (I was going to say world, but thats not really true, is it?) –MR